emerging leadership journeys (elj) is an academic journal ...€¦ · editorial members . faculty,...

Emerging Leadership Journeys, Vol. 4 Iss. 1, Spring 2011. © 2011 Regent University School of Global Leadership & Entrepreneurship ISSN 1930-806X | [email protected]

Volume 4, Issue 1 | Spring 2011

Emerging Leadership Journeys (ELJ) is an academic journal that provides a forum for emerging

scholars in the field of leadership studies. Contributors to this journal are Ph.D. students enrolled

in the Organizational Leadership program in Regent University’s School of Global Leadership &

Entrepreneurship. To stimulate scholarly debate and a free flow of ideas, ELJ is published in

electronic format and provides access to all issues free of charge.

Editorial Staff

Dr. Bruce E. Winston Mrs. Eileen DesAutels Wiltshire Mrs. Brianne Lauka

Editor Managing & Production Editor Copy Editor

Regent University Regent University Regent University

Editorial Members

Faculty, School of Global Leadership & Entrepreneurship

Dr. Cornѐ Bekker

Dr. Paul Carr

Dr. Dail Fields

Production Staff

Mrs. Julia Mattera Mrs. Sarah Stanfield

Communications Specialist Website Production

Regent University Regent University

Emerging Leadership Journeys, Vol. 4 Iss. 1, Spring 2011. © 2011 Regent University School of Global Leadership & Entrepreneurship ISSN 1930-806X | [email protected]

From the Editor

Bruce E. Winston

School of Global Leadership & Entrepreneurship

Regent University

Welcome to Volume 4, Issue 1 of Emerging Leadership Journeys (ELJ). This issue contains

nine of the best research course projects submitted by students in their first, second, third, and

fourth semesters of the Ph.D. in Organizational Leadership program. The Ph.D. in

Organizational Leadership program has, as one of its objectives, to prepare students to conduct

research and publish the findings. During the first year of the program, the focus on research is

more on the conceptual, literature review and model/proposal side, thus the focus in ELJ on these

types of papers. I am pleased to present these articles for your reading and consideration.

Literature Review: e-Leadership

Probal DasGupta Regent University

This article reviews existing literature on e-leadership and the attendant concept of virtual teams. Current scholarship of e-leadership says the goals of leadership have not changed, but the new e-leader needs to implement those goals electronically on computer-mediated virtual teams that are dispersed over space and time. What is very different is that the e-leader may never physically meet one or more of the followers, and that the main communication medium is the computer. The new paradigm provides a range of new opportunities: the ability to instantly communicate one-on-one with employees, customers, and suppliers; the capability to use talent wherever it exists; the opportunity to enhance organizational performance by assembling better multi-functional teams, and to improve better customer satisfaction by using the ―follow the sun‖ methodology; the ability to cut costs; and, scope for better knowledge management. These can positively impact an organization‘s competitive advantage. However, e-leaders also have new challenges: how to bridge the physical distance from the followers; how to communicate effectively with far-flung team members; how to convey enthusiasm and inspire followers electronically; how to build trust with someone who may never see the leader; and so on. The article discusses what new skills the e-leader might require for success. It also examines the concept of the virtual team from various angles: structure, communication, degrees of virtuality, multi-cultural issues, trust-building, ethical issues, and so on. Finally, the technology that supports e-leadership and virtual teams is briefly discussed.

This article presents existing literature on e-leadership. This researcher primarily utilized the following databases through the Regent University Library access: ABI/Inform, Business Source Premier, EBSCO Online, Emerald Management XTRA, IngentaConnect, and ScienceDirect. The following major key words, phrases, and their variants were used in researching the databases: e-leadership, eLeadership, virtual leadership, distant leadership, tele-leadership, leading from a distance, leading through telecommunications, leading through ICT, leading virtual organizations, leading virtual teams, and leading virtual workforces. Seventy-seven journal articles were ultimately shortlisted for this study and reviewed. The existing body of knowledge thus discovered falls under three categories: e-leadership; virtual teams and workforces; and technology.

Literature Review: e-Leadership P a g e | 2

Emerging Leadership Journeys, Vol. 4 Iss. 1, pp. 1- 36. © 2011 Regent University School of Global Leadership & Entrepreneurship ISSN 1930-806X | [email protected]

e-Leadership

The articles in this section define and explore the relatively new leadership paradigm of e-leadership that has arisen in little more than a decade. Authors identify: (a) what is common between e-leadership and the traditional forms of leadership, and what is different; (b) what are the new opportunities and challenges; (c) what are the new skills required by this new generation of leaders; and (d) how do existing leadership theories apply in this new paradigm.

Zaccaro and Bader (2003) noted that today‘s organizational leader grapples with two interrelated forces: (a) the increasingly global dispersion of divisions and subunits, customers, stakeholders, and suppliers of the organization; and (b) ―the exponential explosion in communication technology‖ that has led to ―greater frequency of daily interactions with colleagues, coworkers, subordinates and bosses‖ dispersed geographically. As a reaction to these changes, ―organizational scientists have begun to talk about ‗e-leadership‘ to refer to leaders who conduct many of the processes of leadership largely though electronic channels.‖ The authors postulated that in view of the rapid technology growth in organizations and their increasingly global reach, in the near future ―e-leadership will be the routine rather than the exception in our thinking about what constitutes organizational leadership.‖

Avolio, Kahai, and Dodge (2000) reviewed existing literature to reach a broad understanding of what constitutes e-leadership in organizations. This article represents one of the first instances of the use of the term e-leadership: ―We chose the term e-leadership to incorporate the new emerging context for examining leadership.‖ The authors defined e-leadership as ―a social influence process mediated by AIT (advanced information technology) to produce a change in attitudes, feelings, thinking, behavior, and/or performance with individuals, groups, and/or organizations.‖ They also asserted that e-leadership ―can occur at any hierarchical level in an organization,‖ involving both one-to-one as well as one-to-many interactions over electronic media. The authors used the Adaptive Structuration Theory (AST) to study how technology and leadership impact each other—more specifically, how technology impacts leadership and is itself changed by leadership. AST is based on the theory that ―human action is guided by structures, which are defined as rules and resources that serve as templates for planning and accomplishing tasks.‖ The authors‘ research indicated that technology creates organization structures of which leadership is a part, but at the same time, these organization structures continue to be transformed by the impact of leadership and technology. Leadership and technology, therefore, enjoy a recursive relationship, each affecting and at the same time being affected by the other; each transforming and being transformed by the other. Avolio et al. also examined in detail the available research for a special case of advanced information technology called Group Support Systems (GSS). According to the authors, GSS ―represents a microcosm



of the potential effects that can occur concerning the interface between leadership processes, group processes, individual processes, and AIT at a group level, and over time at organizational and inter-organizational levels.‖ GSS is especially relevant for an understanding of e-leadership because it is one information technology domain where research has specifically examined leadership style and processes. According to the authors, ―the repeated appropriation of information technology generates or transforms social structures, which over time become institutionalized.‖ They discovered that the use of GSS can transform behavior from ―working with a norm of equality of input, which was more consistent with the system's spirit, to one based on hierarchical norms,‖ as groups became more comfortable allowing for everyone to provide input. This, the authors observed, enhanced the group's interactions ―beyond the GSS designer's original intent.‖ The researchers identified the key characteristics of an AIT-enabled economy as ―real-time information availability, greater knowledge sharing with stakeholders, and the use of this information and knowledge to build ‗customized‘ relationships,‖ and noted, ―one of the main challenges leaders face today is how optimally to integrate human and information technology systems in their organizations to fully leverage AIT.‖ The authors also noted that although organizations implement AIT with the expectation of business and personal benefits including increased efficiency, productivity, and profitability, ―no demonstrable relationship between dollars invested in AIT and corporate profits has been reported.‖ On the topic of e-leadership‘s adaptation to new technology, the authors noted that ―the leadership system in an organization can be characterized by its spirit or intent,‖ and that ―consistency between the leadership's spirit and AIT's spirit is important for faithful appropriations, and will likely predict how successful or unsuccessful insertion of new technology will be in an organization.‖

Kissler (2001) began his examination of e-leadership by posing the question: ―what kind of leadership will be required for the pursuit of e-business?‖ Noting the prior premise that all previous business challenges occurred within a market characterized by incremental change, Kissler took the position that ―the past – from a business leadership perspective – can be prologue to the future,‖ and offered ―a review of historic drivers of discontinuous change in support of such a view.‖ Beginning with a review of documented past successful leadership actions in organizations such as General Electric Co., Cisco Systems, Owens-Corning, Dell Computer, British Airways, Citicorp (now Citigroup), Aetna, and Wal-Mart Stores, the author suggested that ―today‘s leaders adopting an e-business strategy would face similar fundamental leadership challenges.‖ Kissler examined what he called ―an interesting array of actions‖ that successful leaders have taken to address discontinuous change, and suggested that a study of this evidence has important implications for e-leadership. The categories of the ―more successful actions‖ reviewed by the author include: organizational mind share; ―FuturePrint;‖ organizational alignment; proximity management; creative tension;



sense of urgency; development of people; leading by values; and, resistance and air-cover. In examining these actions, Kissler showed the primary actions that have been taken by successful leaders over the years, and then offered ―e-business insights (the ‗e‘ factor) that provide clues as to how these actions might be modified in today‘s business environment.‖ The author concluded by identifying some e-leadership attributes from Toffler: cognitive skills and education; quick adaptability to change; flexibility; ability to work for more than one boss; the ability to keep ones‘ heads in the midst of disorder and ambiguity; experience in several different fields and the ability to transfer ideas from one to the other; individuality; and entrepreneurialism.

Walker (2000) defined an e-business as a company whose ―Internet-based activities are the primary source of its revenues and profits.‖ The author examined the practices necessary to build organization success and prosperity in the ―internet economy,‖ and acknowledged that ―the pressure is intense for capable leaders‖ desiring to build successful e-businesses. Walker addressed the issue of rapid change that is symptomatic of modern times, and noted that building successful enterprises today requires leadership to effectively manage this rapid business change. In many cases, "old economy" companies are cannibalizing their old businesses in order to accelerate e-business growth (Walker). According to Walker, transformation in the face of resistance is the major leadership challenge. Finally, the author stated that in general, e-business is becoming a part and parcel of every business strategy, a potent and omnipresent "state of mind" in leadership, regardless of whether a company is building from scratch or transforming from an established business.

Annunzio (2001) dramatically drove home his perspective of this new model of leadership with a deliberately exaggerated scenario: ―What if one morning you arrived at your corporate offices and no one was there?‖ The author focused on the e-leader‘s need to generate inter-generational cooperation (meaning, between the baby boomers, and the generations X and Y). In general, the author aimed to prepare e-leadership to respond to the new rules of competition in the digital age; to introduce the rhetoric of change in the organization and help bridge the gap between what is stated and what is practiced; to assist e-leaders attract the best talent from generations X and Y; and to underscore the enduring goodness of traditional corporate America. Annunzio identified seven distinguishing factors of the new e-leadership: honesty, responsiveness, vigilance, willingness to learn and re-learn, a sense of adventure, vision, and altruism. The author addressed the need for inter-generational cooperation with out-of-the-box leadership advice, such as to ask ―unaskable questions,‖ speak ―unspeakable truths,‖ ―make loud statements,‖ ―communicate irreverently,‖ and so on. The author concluded by saying that the evolutionary e-leader has a compelling need to make a difference.



Hanna (2007) authored a large World Bank study of e-leadership as it applies to the government sector and public institutions. Hanna sought to come up with information that will help countries to move ―from visions of the potential of the ongoing information and communication technology revolution‖ to ―real competitive, innovative and knowledge-based economies.‖ The author identified several broad trends in governments across the world: (a) there is a shift toward direct and institutionalized engagement of the president, prime minister, CEO or a powerful coordinating ministry like finance or economy as the ―e-leader‖ in government; (b) countries have moved from ad-hoc responses, informal processes, and temporary relationships to institutionalized structures to respond to the challenges of the knowledge economy and technology-enabled development; (c) many countries are opting to create an independent and strong national ICT agency that reports directly to the president, prime minister, or the equivalent; and (d) as e-government programs take hold and mature, countries start to fully integrate e-government into the governance framework and activity of each sector and agency. Hanna went on to discuss the definition of e-development, the strategic issues in designing e-institutions, five basic models for e-institutions, critical success factors, and core institutional capabilities. The author concluded with a call for more research.

Avolio and Kahai (2003) discussed how technology is affecting leadership in organizations by defining e-leadership and exploring how e-leadership impacts leaders, followers, teams, and organizations. The authors described e-leadership as not just an extension of traditional leadership, but as being ―a fundamental change in the way leaders and followers relate to each other within organizations and between organizations.‖ The authors also noted that some fundamentals of leadership will probably always be the same, even in this new context. The authors concluded with some practical observations emanating from their research on e-leadership. The imperative behind e-leadership was created by what the authors described as the ―quiet revolution‖ that resulted in the ―wiring of organizations so that many significant human interactions are now mediated by information technology.‖ The authors described leadership as ―a dynamic, robust system embedded within a larger organizational system.‖ They went on to explain that well-defined organizational structures delineate ―the relationships expected among people who work in those organizations.‖ ICT (information and communication technology) today implements these same organization structures electronically across time and space, where not only does the communication between leader and follower take place via information technology, but even ―the collection and dissemination of information required to support organizational work‖ is discharged via the electronic media (Avolio & Kahai). Today, leaders may lead entire projects from a distance and interact with followers or team members solely through information technology. E-leadership takes shape in the virtual context where collaboration and leader-follower interaction are mediated by



ICTs, and e-leadership aims to create and distribute the organizational vision, glue corporations or individuals together, as well as direct and supervise the execution of the plans. Like traditional face-to-face leadership, e-leadership too can be inspiring by communicates via e-mail or other electronic means their pride in the accomplishments of various teams, reinforced periodically by stories shared electronically throughout the organization. The authors emphasized that they are ―fairly confident that leadership mediated by information technology can exhibit exactly the same content and style as traditional face-to-face leadership.‖ Referring to how access to information and media has changes, the authors mentioned that followers today have access to the same information that leaders have, and this puts pressure on the leadership to be ready with all the latest facts to justify their position at any time. Today a disgruntled employee can instantly communicate their angst to hundreds, if not thousands, of colleagues at the touch of a button. The authors advised e-leaders to balance the traditional with the new, to openly communicate their intent, and to fully use technology to reach-out and touch others.

Hamilton and Scandura (2003) examined the concept of e-mentoring in a digital world as a necessary corollary to e-leadership; identified potential benefits and challenges; and discussed the opportunity to extend technology to address relationship building and nurturing. Underscoring the importance of mentoring in general, the authors quoted other scholars to justify that in the race to the top, mentoring can make a difference. Hamilton and Scandura discussed the barriers to e-mentoring, such as organizational barriers, individual barriers, interpersonal barriers, and the changing nature of work. The authors explored the e-mentoring dimensions defined by functions and phases. Technology is a critical component of e-mentoring, and the use of technology can be influenced by situational factors, social factors and usability factors. Gender, ethnicity, age and personality also play a part. Integrating technology with the traditional mentoring models is a challenge that must be overcome. The authors concluded the e-mentoring is important and extends the use and flexibility of the traditional mentoring models across time and space.

Avolio, Walumbwa, and Weber (2009) observed that leading virtually not only involves leading people from different departments and divisions of one‘s own organization, but sometimes even people from competitor companies. In such virtual teams, challenges are more likely to occur when the target sphere of influence spreads across multiple time zones; when local communication and human infrastructures fail; when there is incompatible hardware and software that require integration; or when local work demands necessitate the urgent attention of co-located managers and workers, ―thereby creating pressure to pursue local priorities over the objectives of distant collaborators.‖ The authors identified some common questions regarding e-leadership in general: How does the nature and structure of technology impact leadership style influencing follower motivation and performance? What is the effect of e-leadership on trust



formation? Will the nature of the technology such as its richness or transparency be a factor in building trust in virtual teams? How will mediation through the computer affect the quality and quantity of the communication between team members? How will the nature of the task and its complexity influence how leadership affects virtual team performance?

Malhotra, Majchrzak and Rosen (2007) studied virtual teams to identify the best leadership practices of effective leaders of virtual teams. The study collected survey, interview, and observational data and concluded that successful e-leadership practices included the ability to: (a) generate and sustain trust through the utilization of ICT (information and communication technology); (b) make sure that distributed diversity is both clearly understood as well as well appreciated; (c) effectively monitor and manage the life cycles of virtual work; (d) monitor and manage the virtual team‘s progress with the use of technology, (e) extend the visibility of virtual members both within the team as well as outside the company; and (f) help ensure that individual team members do benefit from the team.

Pulley and Sessa (2001) explored the impact of digital technology on leadership and identified e-leadership as a complex challenge that is defined by five key paradoxes: (a) swift and mindful; (b) individual and community; (c) top-down and grass-roots; (d) details and big picture; and (e) flexible and steady. In order for people to overcome the challenge of e-leadership, people in organizations must make sense together of the challenges facing them, and participate in leadership at every level. According to the authors, perhaps the greatest e-leadership challenge is how to make individuals work collectively to create a culture that allows all the voices of leadership to be heard.

Gurr (2004) argued that although e-leadership is a relatively recently emerged concept with continuing conceptual ambiguity, there are significant differences between leading traditional organizations and those that have technology-mediated environments. These environments appear to require leaders to cope with paradoxes and dilemmas, and with the associated behavioral complexity. The e-leader must necessarily establish an appropriate social climate through sustained communication, and be able to convey exemplary interpersonal skills through the associated technology. E-leadership also poses greater emphasis on dispersed leadership. In some situations, such as anonymous groups, formal leadership may be detrimental to group performance. Although more research is indeed required, even at this early stage in the development of e-leadership it is quite apparent that leadership in technology-mediated environments as a special niche is important to us.

Shulman (2001) searched for e-leadership in the food industry and found it missing. The author proposed that the emergence of e-leadership will require industry-level



guidance to the uncommitted, sharing of experience from leaders to followers, and, a regular forum where ―the involved and the curious can exchange ideas.‖

Kerfoot (2010) defined virtual leadership as leading an organization that is other than physical; in other words, it is the management of distributed work teams whose members predominantly communicate and coordinate their work through the electronic media. Virtual leaders are "boundary managers" who inspire people from a distance to develop self-management capabilities. Virtual leaders must focus on the interfacing with the environment. The author focused on the healthcare industry. Distance leadership (or virtual leadership) was found to be increasingly replacing traditional leadership because advancing technologies can support new models of health system communication. Successful virtual leaders learn how to cross time, space, and culture barriers to make improvements across small and large entities in distant venues where direct supervision and interaction are impossible. New skills are required for creating and sustaining high-performance groups across diverse boundaries. The author concluded that the virtual leader must depend on coaching rather than supervision.

Watson (2007) investigated the distributed work environment by specifically focusing on leader behavior and its impact on subordinate outcomes, such as commitment and satisfaction with supervision. Today, the geographic distance between workers is increasing, and this study asks if the traditional core set of leadership behaviors is effective in distributed work environments, and how those behaviors impact followers‘ work results. Fundamental questions that were explored included: (a) essential management behaviors such as consideration and initiating structure; (b) the types of leadership that can have the most positive impact on employee's perceptions of satisfaction with supervision and organizational commitment; and (c) the importance of the amount of face time between the manager and employee. The author reported that correlational data results did not support the hypotheses that face-to-face interaction scores were positively correlated with affective commitment or satisfaction with supervision. Face to face interaction was not negatively correlated with continuance commitment. Physically co-located employees reported significantly higher levels of satisfaction with management than did remote employees. There was a significant difference between virtual and physical employees, with co-located employees reporting higher levels of career advancement than virtual employees. There was also a stronger relationship between initiating structure and satisfaction with supervision when geographical distance was high; therefore, it appears that spatial distance actually acted as an enhancer.

Davis (2004) declared that his goal is to share with western managers some eastern concepts about leadership that may help its practice at a distance (i.e., the practice of e-leadership). The author quoted Robert Frost and Tao Te Ching to underscore the same



east-west synergy of leadership ideas. However, Davis showed that the east-west ideas are contradictory; he described that while the west believes that leaders obtain their power from a transcendent source, the east believes that leadership materializes from a state of being that transcends the individual leader and is shaped by a mixture of his or her character and circumstances, and that the development of the appropriate inner state and character of leaders will enable the leader to lead wisely. This is critical for leadership in virtual teams because the virtual team members seldom meet face-to-face and must use ICT (information and communication technologies) to bridge differences in time and space. When virtual teams consist of members from multiple nations, they become global virtual teams. Global virtual teams can transfer work from East to West as the earth rotates to maintain continuity of work on a 24x7 basis. This ―follow-the-sun approach‖ to organizing work makes special demands on leadership because e-leadership must be exerted across time and space. The definition of work is no longer limited to the confines of a single workday, and e-leadership must stretch its boundaries to match the elastic nature of global work. Successful globalization requires elasticity, openness to change, and extraordinarily gifted managers. Virtual teams help global firms to use the best talent wherever it is located. The global search for talent must also include ideas from other nations and cultures. Taoism, the oldest set of beliefs and practices in one of the world‘s oldest cultures, helps us to understand how the world changes and our place in it. Leadership practice that is rooted in Taoism is transformational and can make virtual teams more effective.

Colfax, Santos and Diego (2009) argued that virtual teams are a necessity in today‘s global, and increasingly even in regional businesses, when operations and employees with special talents are unwilling to relocate. Traditionally key employees—experts with technical skills or senior managers who were urgently needed to head up operations in a foreign location—were relocated along with company expansion and change. But the roles and needs of global operations in the new "green era" are transforming this traditional paradigm. Leaders and thinkers are confronted with the need for a fundamental business transformation that is the result of recent global economic changes. It is imperative to develop a virtual management style that takes advantage of the available technologies and minimizes forced face-to-face environments. This need to adopt and expand virtual leadership, as well as virtual communication, challenges the conventional ways of doing business. Virtual work teams are now critical, and so is the need for the development of a new virtual organizational management paradigm. This necessitates regular training of managers and team members, establishment of trust, and fully embracing delegation and constant inclusive communication among all team members. This is creating the next type of leader style called the e-leadership that will reach around the globe and effectively manage virtual teams and virtual operations. Colfax et al. concluded with the hope that



we can understand and face these challenges so that we can bring global operations successfully into the "green era."

DeRosa (2009) asserted that as virtual teams become more prevalent, organizations must take a close look at how to best ensure the success of these teams. Virtual teams‘ leadership must manage from a distance and will, consequently, face unique issues and challenges.

Yagil (2002) studied the ascription of charisma to socially close and distant leaders. Participants included 554 Israeli combat soldiers, who completed five questionnaires describing their perceptions of either their platoon commander (closer) or their battalion commander (more distant). The results showed that the charisma was attributed to socially close leaders based on (a) the ascription of extraordinary traits to the leader; (b) the perception of the leader as a behavioral model; and (c) his confidence in the individual. However, charisma was attributed to distant leaders based upon (a) the willingness to accept the leader's ideas; (b) the perceived confidence of the leader in the group; (c) the perception of extraordinary traits in the leader; and (d) a general positive impression of the leader. The author discussed these results with regard to the influence of situational variables on the attribution of leadership qualities.

Shriberg (2009) noted that while just a few years ago virtual leadership seemed a task only relevant for international conglomerates, today virtual leadership is essential for almost any business that strives to grow and expand. The company need not have offices in foreign countries or even different cities, in order for management to leverage virtual leadership and virtual teamwork. Virtual leaders need to build technical and human support systems that are ―able to sustain the synergy of the team.‖ Support is also required in building tools that foster teamwork and collaboration between team members. Virtual leadership is a paramount task that demonstrates the effectiveness of a leader. It is a very complex act to lead a group of people who are located in different countries, have different time zones, and speak different languages.

Mobley (2003) observed that many multinational firms operating in Asia in the late 1970s were simply sourcing or assembling for export in joint ventures. But today, one sees the accelerating development of global research and development and design centers to Asia; the development of India and China as global software centers; and the development of multiple bio-science centers in Asia. The author explored distance virtual leadership, leadership styles, leadership‘s value base from a Chinese perspective, organizational culture, influence tactics, economic transformation, localization, and human resource (HR) strategy in China, Asia and other cross-cultural perspectives.



Banerjee and Chau (2004) examined e-leadership in the context of e-government. The e-government objectives of a country go well beyond providing constituents with government information and services by leveraging information and communication technology, the ultimate desired goal being convergence characterized by ubiquitous access to government information and services and total transparency of government functioning, a stage that contributes to the social and economic well being of citizens. The authors proposed a framework for evaluating and analyzing e-government convergence capability in developing countries. The results of the study indicated that the quality and range of e-government services vary significantly across the countries, and that this variance can be attributed in some measure to the e-leadership capability of the countries. The authors reviewed e-leadership in the government context, and argued that e-leadership may not be able to readily combat social maladies or economic handicaps.

Antonakis and Atwater (2002) noted that the concept of leader distance has been subsumed in a number of leadership theories. This article, amongst other goals, discussed leader distance: how distance is implicated in the legitimization of a leader; and, how distance affects leader outcomes. The authors reviewed available literature and demonstrate that an understanding of leader–follower distance is vital to the task of untangling the dynamics of the leadership influencing process. Distance is physical distance, but also social distance. Both types of distance are studies, with physical distance resulting in the need for virtual leadership. Antonakis and Atwater categorized one type of distance leadership as ―virtually close leadership,‖ the type of leader that is ―referred to as an ‗e-leader,‘‖ and, noted that ―virtual communication may bring several advantages and disadvantages.‖

Luther and Bruckman (2010) studied collaborative innovation networks and how they generate swarm creativity by the utilization of the virtual team concept. The authors stepped outside the traditional business context in studying virtual, collaborative networks of amateurs in non-business contexts to provide a crucial and complementary perspective on these phenomena. In particular, the authors studied online communities of Flash animators who collaborate over the internet to create animated movies and games called ―collabs.‖ From a quantitative analysis of nearly 900 collabs on Newgrounds.com, the authors discovered that these projects can be highly successful, attracting hundreds of thousands of Internet audience members to download the completed animations. Luther and Bruckman studied this model for specific factors, including attributes of the e-leader and virtual organizational structures. The focus of the research was on the social dynamics within collabs, especially the role of leadership/e-leadership.

Hambleya, O‘Neil, and Kline (2006) explored the new paradigm of work that can now be conducted anytime, anywhere, in real space or through technology. Leadership



within this new context has been referred to as ―e-leadership‖ or ―virtual leadership.‖ This study investigated the effects of transformational and transactional leadership styles on e-leadership. The authors studied the effect of communication media on team interaction styles and outcomes. In the study, the teams communicated through one of the following three ways: (a) face-to-face, (b) desktop videoconference, or (c) text-based chat. The results of the study were analyzed statistically as well as qualitatively. The results indicated no significant effect of transformational or transactional leadership style on team interaction style or outcome. These and other details were discussed in detail by the authors. This study built upon existing theory on virtual team leadership, which compared to FTF leadership theory. The authors suggested that both transformational and transactional leadership styles are similarly successful across communication media in teams carrying out short-term, problem-solving tasks. The results point to the importance of virtual leaders establishing media through which virtual teams can most efficiently communicate and work together. Hambleya et al. concluded that these results provided further evidence that communication media do have important effects on team interaction styles and cohesion.

Howell, Neufeld, and Avolio (2005) noted that changes in organizational structure, size, complexity, and work arrangements make more leaders responsible for managing followers who are at a distance. They examined transformational and transactional (contingent) leadership with reference to physical distance. The study proposed several hypotheses and studied them. The study tried to predict the performance of one hundred and one business unit managers. The results showed that transformational leadership correctly predicted the performance, but that contingent reward (i.e., transactional) leadership was not related to performance. The physical distance between leader and followers negatively moderated the relationship between transformational leadership and business unit performance, and positively moderated the relationship between contingent reward leadership and performance.

Balthazard, Waldman, and Warren (2009) conducted a study to explore the origins and/or the causes of transformational leadership in virtual teams. The study compared 127 virtual team members of various virtual decision-making teams with 135 members of traditional face-to-face teams with reference to the relation between aspects of personality and the emergence of transformational leadership. It was found that that the type of communication media (i.e., virtual media, or physical media) interacts with extraversion and emotional stability in the prediction of emerging transformational leadership. The authors showed how those personality characteristics were relevant to the emergence of transformational leadership in the physical (face-to-face) teams. However, they were largely unrelated to transformational leadership in the virtual teams. The authors also explored why this was so specifically in the virtual context by analyzing the content of team interactions. After accounting for the degree of activity



level, and the linguistic quality in one's written communication, it was found to predict the emergence of transformational leadership in virtual teams.

Purvanovaa and Bono (2009) experimented with transformational leadership in the context of virtual teams (using computer mediated communication) and physical teams (using face-to-face communication). Thirty-nine leaders led both the teams. Repeated-measures analyses revealed similar mean levels of transformational leadership in both teams. But leader rank varied between the teams. The most effective leaders turned out to be those who increased their transformational leadership style in the virtual teams. Analyses at the team level also revealed that the effect of transformational leadership on team performance was stronger in virtual teams than in face-to-face teams. When team members rated their satisfaction with the project (job performed), transformational leaders more appreciated in the virtual teams than in the physical teams. The authors concluded that transformational leadership has a stronger effect in virtual teams (that use only computer-mediated communication), and that leaders who enhance their transformation leadership styles in virtual teams achieve higher levels of team performance.

Holland, Malvey, and Fottler (2009) examined the challenges of e-leadership in healthcare organization. As health care organizations expand and move into global markets, they face many leadership challenges, including the difficulty of leading individuals who are geographically dispersed. Three new business models were discussed: medical tourism, healthcare outsourcing and telerobotics. These business models require leaders to lead virtually and lead virtual team members. The authors provided global healthcare managers with guidelines for leading and motivating individuals or teams from a distance while overcoming the typical challenges that "virtual leaders" and "virtual teams" face, such as employee isolation, confusion, language barriers, cultural differences, and technological breakdowns.

Terence (2006) stated that the new collaborative workplace is evolving both globally and virtually and presents two major challenges: isolation and confusion. The author discussed these typical e-leadership problems and provided guidance on what the e-leader can do to avoid these problems. In particular, Terence presented ten practical guidelines for enabling such teams to perform at their best. The guidelines included suggestions for thinking proactively, applying cultural intelligence, staying person-centric, establishing predictability, and driving for precise communications. Terence provided an opportunity for traditional leaders to re-skill themselves for e-leadership.

Miller, Aqeel-Alzrooni, and Campbell (2010) presented learning from an interdisciplinary collaborative venture in the virtual environment between four university teams. The exercise was designed to enable students to learn experientially the use of a dynamic social network analysis tools through a variety of projects. Inter-



disciplinary and multi-disciplinary collaborating challenged the virtual team members to ―rapidly and clearly communicate and demonstrate the value of key principles, processes, and work practices while negotiating multiple levels of complexity, knowledge cultures, skills, and capabilities.‖ The authors proposed a framework for future collaboration.

Ratcheva (2009) noted that scholars have argued that heterogeneous knowledge when compiled by geographically separated team members hinder effective sharing and use of a virtual team‘s knowledge. The author examined how virtual teams that are multidisciplinary can interact effectively amongst team members to overcome the barriers to collaboration, and actually take advantage of their ―built in‖ knowledge diversity. The author suggested that ―successful integration of multidisciplinary knowledge can be achieved through team‘s boundary spanning activities.‖

Hertel, Geister, and Konradt (2005) summarized empirical research on the management of virtual teams. Rather than consider virtual teams as distinct from conventional teams, the authors considered all teams, whether physical or virtual, on a virtual continuum—i.e., all of them have varying degrees of virtuality. The article identified five phases in the management lifecycle for teams with high virtuality: Preparation, launch, performance management, team development, and disbanding.

Ryssen and Godar (2000) conducted a study of a multinational virtual team project involving students. Over a period of five semesters, the authors examined the students‘ participation in actual cross-cultural learning alliance within the normal curriculum communicating by emails and the web. They worked effectively as virtual teams to complete their tasks. The authors found that the effectiveness of the projects depended on the e-leaders of the project–the professors. The professors who were successful in assisting students overcome the barriers to intercultural communication had more successful students.

Lin, Wang, Tsai, and Hsu (2010) established a model to explain the structure of perceived job effectiveness in team collaboration. In their model, perceived job effectiveness is―influenced directly by knowledge sharing, cooperative attitude, and competitive conflict,‖ while knowledge sharing is ―influenced by cooperative attitude and competitive conflict.‖ As a result, job effectiveness, as perceived, is influenced indirectly by shared value, perceived trust and perceived benefit, with cooperative attitude and competitive conflict acting as mediating factors.

Carreno (2008) studied e-mentoring with reference to the virtual leader. The author focused on the use of information and communication technology in educational settings. The specific case of the virtual leader and mentor was examined. The second section discussed the main strengths and skills of the virtual leader and their



importance in the management of education at a distance. Carreno concluded by formulating a research question on providing leadership to the virtual or distance learning.

Smits (2010) recounted the adage that learning and leading must go hand in hand for anyone to achieve his or her full leadership potential, and notes that the primary source of learning to lead, to the extent that leadership can be learned, is experience. The authors discussed approaches to leadership development in the virtual context used e-mentoring principles. Founded on the principles of e-leadership learning, Smits‘ proposed methodology utilizes peer-coaching methods, mentoring, and the communication capabilities of the internet to build upon the leadership development achievements. The author called it the E-Leadership Development Peer Coaching Network model.

Virtual Teams and Workforces

E-leadership is mostly about the need to lead geographically dispersed teams, called virtual teams. The articles in this section focus on examining virtual teams from many different angles, such as structure, communication, degrees of virtuality, multi-cultural issues, trust-building, and ethical issues.

Zaccaro and Bader (2003) noted that ―virtual team‖ is a phrase ―that has recently entered prominently into our leadership lexicon.‖ The authors examined the trend toward establishing ―e-teams‖ that ―can span distances and times to take on challenges that most local and global organizations must address,‖ focusing particularly on the similarities and differences between physical teams (―face-to-face teams‖) and ―virtual teams‖ with particular reference to team effectiveness. As the authors asserted, ―the term ‗virtual‘ is misleading because it suggests a degree of unreality, as if such teams exist only in the nether world of electrons.‖ Virtual teams are real teams with real people ―having all of the characteristics, demands, and challenges of more traditional organizational teams,‖ except that (a) members ―either work in geographically separated work places, or they may work in the same space but at different times‖; and (b) not all interaction might occur exclusively through the electronic medium, as there may be a fair amount of physical interaction from time to time. But the new reality is that we now have e-leaders who now lead these new organizational entities called ―e-teams.‖ These teams have two critical and unique features that favor them over traditional teams, and provide competitive advantage to organizations that can employ them successfully: ―E-teams are less limited by geographic constraints placed on face-to-face teams‖ and therefore ―have greater potential to acquire the necessary ‗human capital‘ or skills, knowledge, and capacities‖ required to complete projects; and E-teams have ―greater potential for generating ‗social capital,‘‖ which the authors defined as ―the quality of relationships and networks that leaders and team members form in their



operating environment.‖ Zaccaro and Bader also examined how e-leadership can contribute to the development of e-teams by reducing process losses and enhancing team member trust. How does trust develop in e-teams? The authors quoted existing research to propose a three-stage model: (a) the development of ―calculus-based trust,‖ where team members ―trust fellow workers to behave consistently across different team situations‖; (b) the emergence of ―knowledge-based trust,‖ where team members ―become known to one another well enough that their behaviors can be more easily anticipated‖; and (c) the development of ―identification-based trust‖ when team members ―understand and share each other‘s values, needs, goals, and preferences.‖

Cascio and Shurygailo (2003) used a sense of drama to introduce the new paradigm of work: ―Close your eyes and imagine this picture on the cover of a popular business magazine: An empty freeway leading to a deserted metropolis. The caption reads: ‗It‘s 8:45 a.m.—do you know where your employees are?‘‖ The authors then noted that ―the wired world,‖ on the one hand ―brings us all closer together,‖ although it separates us ―by time and distance.‖ Thus, they argued, ―leadership in virtual teams becomes ever more important.‖ Cascio and Shurygailo traced the growth of virtual teams, examined the various forms they assume, listed the kinds of information and support they need to function effectively, and studied the leadership challenges inherent in each form of virtual team. The authors provided ―workable, practical solutions to each of the leadership challenges identified.‖ Technology enables virtual work arrangements, which may assume various forms, such as telecommuting, teleconferencing, and video-conferencing from geographically dispersed sites. But leadership is the critical factor. Existing research has established that ―leaders make a critical difference in team performance,‖ and ―these findings are just as applicable to virtual teams as they are to teams that interact physically.‖ The authors briefly examined the question, ―why virtual teams?‖ They opined that a major reason for forming virtual teams ―is to cut office-space costs, particularly for employees who spend only a small percentage of their time in the office, such as salespeople and consultants.‖ Furthermore, companies in ―undesirable locations may form virtual teams as a strategy for recruiting employees who have the right skills but do not want to move.‖ Sometimes, virtual teams are formed to integrate ―employees who were added through mergers and acquisitions.‖ The authors identified four categories of virtual teams: (a) Teleworkers: A single manager of a team at one location; (b) Remote teams: A single manager of a team distributed across multiple locations; (c) Matrixed teleworkers: Multiple managers of a team at one location; and (d) Matrixed remote teams: Multiple managers across multiple locations. Cascio and Shurygailo added that ―another dimension to be considered is that of time, where workers are on different or staggered shifts.‖ The authors also discussed trust in virtual teams, emphasizing that ―its importance for virtual teams is even more critical.‖ The authors concluded by re-iterating the key challenges for e-leaders of virtual teams as being: (a) ―the difficulty of keeping tight and



loose controls on intermediate progress toward goals;‖ (b) promoting close cooperation amongst teams members; (c) encouraging and recognizing emergent leaders; (d) knowledge management; (e) establishing and adhering to norms and procedures; and (f) establishing ―proper boundaries between home and work.‖

Hart and Mcleod (2003) examined communication as it occurs in the field and presented leadership lessons culled from a field study that included three business organizations and seven work teams. The authors defined a virtual team as one where members meet face-to-face less than once a month. They studied the relationship between the one hundred and twenty six possible team mates in the sample over a two week period, and categorized all message exchanges under seven categories of messages: informational, planning or action, opinion and feeling, personal, resolution interaction, digression and play, and helping and learning. A detailed study of the messages themselves, followed by in-depth personal interviews of the members, revealed the following findings: (a) close personal relationships are developed one message at a time; (b) communication content between team members with strong personal work relationships is not personal; (c) in strong personal relationships, communication is frequent but short; and (d) relationships in virtual teams are developed and strengthened through a proactive effort to solve problems. The authors concluded that close relationships in virtual teams are not only important for task-oriented action, but are also important for professional satisfaction and individual development.

Zigurs (2003) defined what a virtual team is; reviewed existing knowledge on virtual teams, and on e-leadership; and addressed key issues governing e-leadership of virtual teams. One important component of e-leadership is teams. Virtual teams come in many forms, with various objectives, criteria for team membership, cultural diversity, organizational structure, and so on. Virtual teams present a new challenge to the practice of leadership, because whereas our traditional ideas of team communication is based on face-to-face contact, remote leadership of teams complicates relationship building, the issue of trust, conflict resolution, and dealing with sensitive issues that are best done face to face. Since virtual teams rely on computer-mediated communication across the boundaries of geography, time, culture, and organizational affiliation, e-leadership must investigate and resolve issues such as the following: (a) virtual teams incorporate and redefining the traditional roles of leaders; (b) expressing roles across distance and time; (c) the role of facilitators in virtual teams; and, (d) critical factors for effective virtual teams. Discussing what makes a team ―virtual‖, the author suggested that it is best to think of a team as existing on a continuum of virtuality; the more the dimensions of dispersion or distance, the greater the virtuality. Zigurs defined a virtual team as a collection of individuals who are geographically and/or organizationally or otherwise dispersed, and who collaborate via communication and information technologies in order to accomplish a specific goal. Discussing trust in virtual teams, the author argued that trust can indeed emerge among virtual team members rather



swiftly, but that such trust is fragile and may be difficult to maintain. Leadership in virtual teams comes in varied forms, and virtual teams sometimes may or may not have an assigned leader at all. Different people might take on leadership behavior at different times. Discussing the question of leadership ―presence‖, the author recapped that leaders in traditional teams make their presence known in a variety of ways, including where they sit in meetings, office location and trappings, body language, voice inflections, style of dress, and so on, but these methods are lost in virtual environments. A new kind of presence has to be established, namely a distant, or telepresence, that may be defined by the two dimensions of vividness and interactivity. The title of this article asks the question whether leadership in virtual teams is an oxymoron or opportunity. The author‘s answer was that it is emphatically an opportunity.

Xiao , Seagull, Mackenzie, Klein, and Ziegert (2008) conducted a field experiment in a real-life trauma center with surgical teams operating on patients. In their study, the leader of the surgical unit alternated between co-locating with the team, and moving to an adjacent room (where the leader interacted with the team virtually). The study showed that when the team leader was in the adjacent room, the leader had greater influence on communications between the senior member in the room and other team members. When the team leader was in the same room as the team, the volume of communication between the team leader, the senior member, and junior members was more balanced. When the task urgency was high, the team leader was more involved with the senior team member in terms of communication regardless of location, whereas the communication between the team leader and junior members was reduced.

Balthazard, Waldman, and Atwater (2008) examined the role of e-leadership in mediating virtual group member interaction by comparing virtual and face-to-face teams. The study revealed that group members were generally more cohesive in face-to-face situations; accepted group decisions more readily; and exhibited a greater amount of synergy than they did virtual teams. Face-to-face teams exhibited, in general, a higher volume of constructive interaction in comparison with virtual teams. Virtual teams, on the other hand, scored significantly higher on defensive interaction styles.

Munkvold and Zigurs (2007) discussed that virtual teams often face tight schedules. Therefore, they often need launch quickly and perform instantly. This study focused specifically on the special challenges faced by such teams. The authors used time–interaction performance theory as the framework for following the processes and functions within virtual teams. The task was a software development project. The authors studied in detail the group process. The study showed that virtual teams faced with such daunting challenges must work effectively at multi-dimensions.

Potter (2002) examined whether factors that drive conventional team performance also exist in the virtual environment. Results showed that the interaction styles of virtual



teams affect both performance and process outcomes in ways that are directionally consistent with those exhibited by conventional face-to-face teams.

Youngjin and Alavi (2004) noted that the best way to monitor the pulse of a virtual company is to act virtual, and that sitting in a central office without plugging into the virtual culture was almost a guarantee of failure. The authors studied the behaviors and roles that are enacted by emergent leaders in virtual team settings. They focused specifically on two research questions: (a) What behaviors differentiate emergent leaders from other members in virtual teams; and (b) What roles are performed by the emergent leaders in virtual team settings? The study involved seven virtual teams composed of senior executives of a US federal government agency. In particular, the authors analyzed quantitative and qualitative data to identify differences between team members who emerged as leaders, and as non-leaders, in terms of their behavior as evident from their e-mail messages, which were categorized as task-oriented messages, relationship-oriented messages, or technology-oriented messages. The results indicated that overall, the emergent leaders sent more and longer email messages than their team members did. The number of task-oriented messages, particularly those that were related to logistics coordination, sent by emergent leaders was higher than that of non-leaders. However, there were no differences between emergent leaders and non-leaders in terms of expertise-related messages. No significant differences in relationship oriented and technology management messages between emergent leaders and other team members existed. Furthermore, the emergent leaders enacted three roles: initiator, scheduler, and integrator. These findings are discussed and their implications for research and practice are described further by the authors.

Hunsaker and Hunsaker (2008) provided guidelines to help leaders understand and lead virtual teams. The authors offered a formal technique based on a design/methodology approach and discussed the importance of effective leadership for virtual teams. Beginning with a review of conventional teams versus virtual teams, the authors then focused on two primary leadership functions in virtual teams: performance management and team development. Hunsaker and Hunsaker provided a detailed guide for the leadership of virtual teams over the life of a project, which they defined as the four stages of a project timeline: Pre-Project, Project Initiation, Midstream, and Wrap-Up.

Walvoord, Redden, Elliott, and Coovert (2008) noted that practice of effective leadership necessarily requires relationship skills in the areas of problem solving conflict management, motivation, communication, and listening. They argued that perhaps the paramount leadership skill involves communicating one‘s intent to followers, for it is only then that followers may first understand, and then execute the goals of the team and leader. In a world dominated by computer-mediated communication, such communication is fundamental to the viability of virtual teams.



However, simple transmission of information may not suffice, because the virtual environment presents significant challenges for effective communication. The authors examined developments in multimodal displays that allow teams to communicate effectively via single or multiple modalities (e.g., visual, auditory, tactile). Firmly grounded in commonly acceptable guiding principles for the design and use of information displays culled from an extensive review of the literature, Walvoord et al. presented a practical example of the utility of these guiding principles for multimodal display design in the context of communicating a leader‘s presence to a virtual team via commander‘s intent.

Kayworth and Leidner (2000) identified the growing popularity of inter-organizational alliances, the increasingly flatter organizational structures, the globalization of commercial operations, the shift from production to service related businesses, and the resultant spawning of a new generation of knowledge workers not bound to physical work locations as factors contributing to an accelerated the need for virtualization of teams. The global virtual team has emerged as a new form of organizational structure, supported by enabling information and communication technologies. The advantages are: (a) the ability to maximize organizational expertise without having to physically relocate individuals; the required expertise for a given task or project may be dispersed at multiple locations throughout the organization, but a virtual team facilitates the pooling of this talent to provide focused attention to a particular problem without having to physically relocate individuals; (b) the ability to unify the varying perspectives of different cultures and business customs to avoid counterproductive ethno-centric biases; (c) cost reduction; (d) cycle-time reduction; and, (e) improved decision-making and problem solving skills. In the future, the source of human achievement may not be extraordinary individuals, but extraordinary combinations of people. Just as companies benefit from virtual teams, they must also face numerous complexities inherent to this new type of work group: difficulty in managing communication effectively, varying time zones, technology disparity, and differences in technology proficiency amongst virtual team members. Keyworth and Leidner discussed the results of an exploratory global virtual team project undertaken with members from Mexico, Europe, and the United States. The authors attempted to identify specific issues and challenges faced by virtual teams, to identify critical success factors, and to stimulate compelling ideas for future research. The study was conducted amongst twelve virtual teams that were given the freedom to select whatever technology seemed to be most appropriate for the assigned task. Interestingly, there was a significant variance among teams in their adoption and use of various technologies. While some teams adopted e-mail alone, others adopted e-mail, internet collaborative tools, as well web pages. Anecdotal evidence suggests that team member experience with technology may have had a significant role in their adoption of technology. Upon final analysis of the experimental data emerging from the field, the



authors were able to identify four basic classes of issues faced by virtual team groups: communications, culture, technology, and project management. The study also provided rich insights into some of the types of specific challenges faced by culturally diverse global virtual teams. By studying these challenges, the authors derived and articulated a set of critical success factors believed to be important in the successful design and deployment of virtual teams. Some of these success factors for virtual teams are no different from success factors for physical teams; for instance, the three major domains remain: communication, culture, and project management. But some of the challenges within these domains are unique to the virtual environment: (a) problems as delayed communication; (b) misunderstandings arising out of lack of response; (c) lack of a shared context within which to interpret messages; and, (d) the inability to monitor team members. Also significant was the fact that the solutions at the disposal of team leaders to correct the problems of teamwork are quite different in the virtual environment where much of the control and reward capabilities of the leader are reduced. So the e-leader must create inventive solutions to address team problems.

Nauman, Khana and Ehsana (2010) noted that virtual teams can rapidly respond to business globalization challenges, and that their use is expanding exponentially. The authors studied the relationship of empowerment, e-leadership style, and customer service standards as a measure of effective project management in projects involving virtual teams. The authors measured empowerment through two constructs: (a) the psychological empowerment construct, where the focus is the individual‘s psychological empowerment state; and (b) the empowerment climate, where the focus is on work environment. The study compared the empowerment climate across projects exhibiting different degrees of virtuality. Nauman et al. also examined the moderating effects of the degree of virtuality on the relationship between empowerment and leadership style. The authors tested their hypotheses with information collected from project management professionals in five countries using statistical methods and operations research concepts such as linear programming. The results revealed that the empowerment climate had a significant effect on concern for task, concern for people, and concern for customer service. The authors also discovered that empowerment is higher in more virtual projects. The authors concluded with the hope that project management professionals will be more conscious of both psychological empowerment and empowerment climate and concern for people in their projects that have any degree of virtuality.

Salomon (2009) examined how certain technologies affect digital natives and seeks to understand specific correlations that emerge among video games, and colleges that offer both traditional and online courses. He examined interesting questions such as whether there a significant difference between learning preferences and playing video games, and whether there is a correlation between playing games online and taking virtual courses. Two hundred and thirty-five Miami Dade College students participated



in this study. Although the results showed no significant relationships within the inferential assessment, close examination revealed a trend effect (p = .052) in participants' preference for virtual or hybrid courses, which reflected their amount of technology usage. Moreover, if this trend is accurate, then it may indicate that digital natives will be more inclined toward preferring virtual or hybrid courses over their traditional counterparts.

Chad, Craig, and Ying (2001) argued that it is critical that managers build stronger relationships and cohesion among virtual team members as they have significant impact on the performance and satisfaction of virtual teams. The effect of social factors on the performance and satisfaction of virtual teams have been recognized. Social factors such as relationship building, cohesion, and trust are crucial for the effectiveness of virtual teams. Communication is a tool that directly influences the social dimensions of the team. The performance of the team has a positive impact on satisfaction with the virtual team.

Lurey and Raisinghani (2001) described that the issues of effectiveness within virtual teams have become critical for companies that are dispersed across space, time, and/or organizational boundaries. Globalization of the marketplace makes such distributed work groups achieve a competitive advantage in this ever-changing business environment.

Lunman and Barth (2003) explored the dilemma between exploitation and exploration in dispersed "bridge-teams," i.e., teams in a firm working closely with an external partner. The authors examined what type of learning is generated in teams and presented four cases from two firms giving some variety in learning approaches. The researchers argued that distinctiveness of the activity being performed, the team itself, and the company have an ultimate influence on the learning (what is learned and how much is shared). The authors argued that virtual teams that are multi-cultural have higher exposure to a variety of rich knowledge.

Kelley and Sankeya (2008) studied whether virtual projects provide different challenges from conventional projects. Can virtual projects be more useful – in certain contexts - than those conducted by face-to-face teams? The authors looked at two distributed information technology projects conducted within a global banking corporation. Their findings indicated that time zone and cultural differences in particular, affected communication and team relations. The authors concluded that virtual teams are useful for projects requiring cross-functional or cross-boundary skilled inputs.

Andrew and Chris (2001) presented virtual team studies conducted in a European automobile project. The authors investigated how advanced information technology and telecommunications could support virtual teamwork alongside the automotive



engineering supply chain. Incorporating video conferencing shared whiteboard, online application sharing and data management tools, the project involved approximately 40 engineers in four countries. The study found that the potential savings in automotive design development time could be around 20%, which could translate into cost savings of 90 million pounds. The authors identified and recommended some basic technical requirements for a collaborative environment.

Panteli (2004) addressed the question of ―presence‖ in virtual teams. Articulating ―presence‖ virtually is a touch challenge. The empirical data was taken from a series of emails that were exchanged. The study identified three different articulations of ―presence‖ in a virtual organization: (a) present availability; (b) absent unavailability; and (c) silenced availability. The author concluded with the statement, ―These discursive articulations of presence are central to understanding virtual organizing and the theoretical and practical implications of this are discussed.‖

Workman, Kahnweiler, and Bommer (2010) discussed telecommuting (alternate name proposed: Telework) and virtual teams as strategic organizational innovations with wide ranging potential benefits for all concerned: individuals, business, and society. This empirical study investigated telework and virtual team innovations from the perspective of commitment, information richness, and cognitive style (mental self-government) theory. Workman et al. reported that their findings indicated certain combinations of cognitive styles and media as contributing to commitment in telecommuting. The authors concluded by making some specific recommendation on setting up a telework environment for best success.

Pithon, Brochaod, Sandonato, and Teixeira (2006) focused on the task of communicating from a distance. Virtual work modifies established habits of teamwork, and extends the concepts of space and time. Innovations in communications and computer science present new ways of distributing knowledge and reinforce cooperative work. Pithon et al. presented an analysis of application boarding of Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) developed by two workgroups with distinct objectives. While group-A launched a virtual team for cooperative work, group-B analyzed the functioning of a small company virtually.

Paul, Seetharaman, Samarah, and Mykytyn (2004) examined collaborative conflict management in a multi-cultural heterogeneous virtual team consisting of members from the United States and India, working on a project involving a decision to be taken for a client. The entire process was conducted virtually, and a web-based decision support system was utilized that allowed team members to effectively collaborate, including discussing task options, critique suggestions, and vote on the results. The data analyses suggested that collaborative conflict management style positively impacted satisfaction with the decision-making process, perceived decision quality, and



perceived participation of the virtual teams. The study found only weak evidence that linked a group‘s heterogeneity to its collaborative conflict management styles.

Dekker, Rutte, and Van den Berg (2008) conducted a study that investigated whether members of a virtual consisting of members from the United States, India and Belgium assigned the same priorities to some behavioral structures as did virtual team members from an earlier Dutch study. Thirty-four virtual team members from the three countries were interviewed by means of the critical incident technique, involving four hundred and ninety-three critical incidents grouped into thirteen categories. The study found discrepancies between the results of the earlier Dutch study and this one. Indian and Belgian team members identified a new category: Respectfulness.

Huang, Kahai, and Jestice (2009) focused on decision-making challenges in a virtual team. How do e-leaders structure team processes and provide task support? The authors explored the interaction effects between leadership styles and media richness on task cohesion and cooperative climate. This, in turn, influenced team outcome in decision-making tasks. The results obtained suggest that transactional leadership behaviors directly improve task cohesion of the team, while transformational leadership indirectly improve task cohesion by first improving the cooperative climate within the team, which, in turn, improves task cohesion. These effects on team outcome were mediated by media richness—they occurred only when media richness was low. The study also advocated that task cohesion results in group consensus and members‘ satisfaction with the discussion, whereas cooperative climate enhances discussion satisfaction and reduces time spent on the task.

Lee (2009) addressed the question of ethics in virtual teams. Lee began by presenting a literature review on current ethical theories as they relate to e-leadership, virtual teams, and virtual project leadership. Ethical theories reviewed included participative management, Theory Y, and its relationship to utilitarianism; Kantian ethics, motivation, and trust; communitarian ethics, ethic of care and egalitarianism; Stakeholder Theory; and the use of political tactics. The author concluded by presenting four propositions for future research.

Bryant, Albring, and Murthy (2009) explored human dynamics in virtual teams. The authors postulated three hypotheses: (a) The use of a mixed-incentive reward structure will improve team member satisfaction, influence group cohesion, and reduce social loafing in a virtual team; (b) There will be enhanced team member satisfaction as well as team cohesion and reduced social loafing with the use of a richer technology medium; and (c) Team member satisfaction, group cohesion, and perceived social loafing will differ between males and females. The study was conducted using eighty-nine MBA students at a large southeastern university. The results showed that social loafing decreased with the use of a mixed incentive reward structure; that social loafing



decreased with the use of a richer technology medium; and that social loafing did differ between males and females, with the females engaging in greater social loafing in the absence of a mixed incentive scheme. The results thus also shed light on the role of gender in virtual teams.

D‘Souza and Colarelli (2010) studied the issue of team member selection in a virtual team. The authors examined the importance of task skills and four personal characteristics when selecting members of virtual and Physical (face-to-face) teams. The study, involving one hundred undergraduate students, indicated that task skills had a greater impact on selection decisions for virtual teams. Females appeared to take more females into their teams in both virtual and physical environments; thus, gender bias was an issue. The study did not find any influence of race, physical attractiveness, and attitudinal similarity to participants.

Reed and Knight (2010) reported on a study in which over one hundred and fifty information technology professionals (some of them participating remotely) participated in an exercise that examined the differences in communication risk between traditional project teams and virtual project teams. The results indicated little difference between the two circumstances. However, virtual team projects exhibited notably more risk due to insufficient knowledge transfer.

Greenberg, Greenberg, and Antonucci (2007) investigated trust in a virtual team environment. In physical teams, trust is generally established over time only when there is a history of reliable behavior. Therefore, it follows that it will be hard to establish trust in virtual teams because there is no physical contact and no history. The study found that swift trust can develop quickly in a virtual team, but that such trust can be quite fragile. Greenberg et al. described the three components of trust building—ability, integrity, and benevolence—and assigned these to different stages in the life cycle of a virtual team. The authors proposed how e-leaders and virtual team members can develop trust and sustain it through the entire project lifecycle.

Kanawattanachai and Yoo (2002) conducted an empirical study to examine the dynamic nature of trust in virtual teams. The authors also drew distinction between high-performing virtual teams and low-performing virtual teams and sought explanation for the performance differential and its influence on trust. The study differentiated in the amount of trust in the early stage, middle stage and late stage of a project. Using data gleaned from a study of thirty-six four-person MBA teams from six universities competing in a web-based business simulation game over a eight week process, the authors found that both high-performing and low-performing teams started with similar levels of trust, but high-performing teams were better at developing and maintaining the trust level throughout the project life.



Rusman, Bruggen, Sloep, and Koper (2009) hypothesized that a hampered process of trust building in virtual teams that work in knowledge-intensive applications can cause collaboration problems. The authors want to understand how interpersonal trust forms in physical teams and in virtual teams. Only such an understanding can facilitate the prevention of low trust. Synthesizing literature from various disciplines, the authors proposed a model for the formation of interpersonal trust between project team members. The authors devised a method whereby they tried to make information on virtual team members available to others, to see if that enabled better trust building. The authors also reviewed existing literature on the antecedents of trustworthiness. They finally extended the well-accepted antecedents (ability, benevolence, and integrity) with several other antecedents (communality and accountability). The authors used these antecedents to determine which information is relevant for team members in assessing the trustworthiness of other team members.

Navarro, Orengo, Zornoza, Ripoll, and Peiro (2010) studied the effect of communication and information technologies (TICs) on group functioning and group outcomes. Virtual teams need to communicate to share task related information and knowledge. From this perspective, this study sought to: (a) analyze the group interaction styles in virtual teams over time; and (b) analyze whether the group virtuality level moderates the relationships between group interaction style and group outcomes over time. Forty-four groups of four members each participated in the study. The virtual teams had varying degrees of virtuality. The results showed a differential role of group interaction style according to the level of group virtuality.

Technology

The virtual teams are connected by information and communication technology, and all interaction amongst the virtual team members, as well as with their leader(s) is mediated by computers. The articles in this section examine some aspects of this technology.

Peña-Mora, Hussein, Vadhavkar, and Benjamin (2000) presented software architecture for the next generation of virtual collaboration amongst a geographically dispersed team. In particular, the software architecture addresses a concurrent engineering environment to help engineers and designers collaborate effectively in virtual space. Peña-Mora et al. discussed research in computer-supported collaboration work based on various models of group interaction, social communication theory, negotiation theory, and distributed artificial intelligence concepts. The authors described a distributed conferencing architecture called the Collaborative Agent Interaction and Synchronization system (CAIRO), aimed at managing virtual interaction amongst designers and engineers in a distributed design meeting setting. The technology supports multi-media interactions over computer networks remotely and allows the



virtual team members to interact in a media rich manner. The system provides both media synchronization and agent synchronization. Therefore, it ensures that all information exchanged between users is synchronized, and also guarantees effective structuring and control of a distributed conference.

Zigurs (2003) noted that leadership in virtual teams is expressed through technology; therefore leaders must know how to make sense of technology in order to make the most competent use of it. The author described communication technology in terms of media richness, which he said influences media choice, and elaborated that it is natural to choose the right media that will provide enhanced performance virtual groups. The author categorized media richness in terms of rapid feedback, language variety, personalization, and multiple cues. The greater the ability of a medium to provide for those characteristics, the richer the medium is. Zigurs presented an alternative to viewing media from a richness perspective by looking at it in terms of media synchronicity, which deals with two basis processes: (a) conveyance, which is the exchange of information, and an attempt to understand its meaning with reference to symbol variety, parallelism, feedback, rehearsability, and reprocessability; and, (b) convergence, which is the development of shared understanding on the meaning of the information exchanged.

Jarvenpaa and Tanriverdi (2003) identified a new kind of technical structure, if not technology itself, called the virtual knowledge network that supports the e-leader. They noted that knowledge resources today are more important than physical and financial resources as "drivers of firm performance." The organizations themselves are transitioning from hierarchical tree structures to flatter web-like structures that better facilitate the flow of knowledge. The firms now create networks of customers, vendors, partners and business associates and "tap into complementary knowledge sources." As a result the place where working, learning and innovation occur appears to have moved from inside the organizations to a virtual knowledge network. The authors observed that organizations cope with uncertainties by designing structures that increase their information processing ability, a virtual knowledge network being one such structure, consisting of hardware, software, digital media, electronic records, intellectual property, people, and so on. It is a ―transient, boundary-less, lateral, and computer-mediated organization structure.‖ Jarvenpaa and Tanriverdi explained this type of e-leadership to be ―network-centric leadership practice,‖ and concluded by noting that firms need leadership that can create and nurture these virtual knowledge networks.

Petzel, Archer, and Fei (2010) explored how the web's collaborative potential can be harnessed strategically and practically in a sustainable manner. Building upon research led by Peter Gloor of MIT into collaborative innovation networks (COINs), the researchers evaluated COINs‘ strategic potential for sustainability as well as their



practical application. The authors also provided a set of recommendations for people considering utilizing COINs for sustainability.

Keen (2000) provided a brash and disruptive definition of leadership in electronic commerce: ―Take your company to a place that no one expects it to go.‖ Focusing mostly on leadership for eCommerce that is virtual, online and conducted in a geographically dispersed manner, Keen explored leadership in terms of structure (―fitting all the pieces together: marketing, technology, process integration, finance and operations‖) with the goal of exploring where information technology fits in: how can I.T. ―be part of the leadership process.‖

Karpova, Correia, and Baran (2008) focused on the technology to support virtual collaboration, computer-mediated communication, and teamwork. This study examined how global learning teams utilized technology in a virtual collaboration to solve complex problems. Explaining the use of technology by the learning teams to support computer-mediated communication, a model of technology application at different stages of virtual collaborative process was proposed. The authors claimed that the model maximizes the potential of global teams and facilitates greater integration of virtual collaboration into a geographically dispersed team. Time difference and lack of nonverbal cues were identified as challenges the global teams faced. The benefits of virtual collaboration are articulated as the opportunities to: learn how to use technology in a meaningful way; practice using technology to solve problems; and broaden one's perspective by communicating with people from different cultures.

Bishop, Riopelle, Gluesing, Danowski, and Eaton (2010) discussed e-mail networks and the technology to support global virtual teams. The authors acknowledged that historically, managing employees that are not co-located has relied mostly on endless e-mail folders bursting at the seams, designed to track issues, manage performance, and distribute workload. Such methods are highly inefficient beyond the most rudimentary data volume. As a result, the distant manager‘s understanding and perception of his virtual team members is often skewed by lack of information – information that they normally obtain by being in close proximity to employees. The authors proposed a set of tools—called the Digital Diffusion Dashboard—that provide metrics and analytics to enable the virtual manager better understand the network that connects him or her with the virtual team. The tools analyze the network the extract analytics pertaining to volumes, response time, individuals with whom an employee regularly interacts, cultural influences in the workload of an employee, ―buzz‖ around critical topics, emotion, and team collaboration. Additionally, the proposed tools can help manage the adoption of new global processes as well as staff changes and turnover to shorten transition time for both incoming and exiting employees. All of these measurements have a significant impact, especially in virtual teams where the tools help bridge the gap between location and perceived performance.



Chen, Liou, Wang, and Chi (2007) focused on collaboration technology that enables web-based group dynamics and group decision support. The authors noted that companies are going global, and this is especially true for companies participating in the global supply chain. To become agile enterprises, these companies are deploying virtual teams to carry out short- and long-term projects. Chen et al. defined ―collaboration‖ as activities that involve people engaged in various business processes (e.g., marketing, engineering, research, and development) working together by sharing information and making decisions. Distributed teams can carry out critical tasks only with appropriate decision support technologies. The authors discussed the architecture and detailed design of a web-based application called TeamSpirit. A series of empirical studies were reported to assess the effectiveness of TeamSpirit in supporting distributed group problem solving when in-person facilitation is not possible. The results indicated that giving creative problem solving training to TeamSpirit participants had positive impacts on team performance.

Danowski (2010) examined technology required for online collaboration. Collaborative Innovation Networks (COINS) are typically defined using individuals as nodes. The different departments in organizations can be considered as forming COINs of interest. Danowski analyzed interdepartmental collaboration networks based on co-occurrence of department names in news stories, and demonstrated the utility of using the WORDij 3.0 tool to identify collaborative innovation networks of interest.

Conclusion

The goals of leadership have not changed, but a new medium for implementing the goals has arisen. The fundamental leadership objectives are still the same, and continue to address the issues of vision, direction, motivation, inspiration, trust, etc. E-leadership is a new leadership paradigm that requires the leader to achieve these leadership objectives in a computer-mediated manner with virtual teams that are dispersed over space and time, the main medium of communication amongst leader(s) and followers being the electronic conduit supported by computers. What is very different is that the e-leader may never physically meet one or more of the followers. The new paradigm provides a plethora of new opportunities, as well as a number of new challenges. Some of the exciting new opportunities are: (a) the ability to instantly communicate one-on-one with potentially thousands of employees (Scott McNealy, the recently retired Chairman of Sun Microsystems, personally articulated corporate vision to over seventeen thousand employees worldwide via email and kept them posted on the realization of that vision); (b) the capability to use talent that does not necessarily live within driving distance from the office; (c) the opportunity to enhance organizational performance by assembling multi-functional teams that are richer because one can now cherry pick the talent one desires from wherever it may exist; (d) the ability to target better customer satisfaction by providing 24x7 service using the ―follow the sun‖



methodology; (e) the ability to cut costs; and (f) the scope for better knowledge management. Some of the key challenges for e-leaders are: (a) communicating effectively through the electronic medium; communicating enthusiasm digitally; (b) building trust with someone who may never see the leader; (c) creating a viable electronic ―presence‖; (d) inspiring far flung team members; (e) mentoring virtual employees; (f) monitoring and controlling social loafing; (g) preventing lack of technical competence from affecting performance; and (h) maintaining work-life balance—and helping followers maintain work-life balance—in this new 24x7 paradigm. Some of the new skills required by the e-leader are: (a) stronger written communication skills; (b) strong social networking skills; (c) a global, multi-cultural mindset; (d) greater sensitivity towards followers‘ state of mind; and (e) a 24x7 orientation. E-leadership is mostly about the need to lead geographically dispersed teams, called virtual teams. The concept of virtual teams is examined from many different angles, such as structure, communication, degrees of virtuality, multi-cultural issues, trust-building, ethical issues etc., many of which are already covered in the discussion on e-leadership. Finally, some newer technological innovations are in progress to support the e-leadership movement. There does not appear to be any serious disagreement amongst scholars on e-leadership; there are only working variations in research focus. There is agreement that this is a new field and that more research needs to be conducted.

About the Author

Probal DasGupta is a student in the School of Global Leadership & Entrepreneurship at Regent University.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Probal DasGupta [Email: [email protected]].

References

Annunzio, S. (2001). eLeadership: Proven techniques for creating an environment of speed and flexibility in the digital economy. New York: Free Press.

Antonakis, J., & Atwater, L. (2002). Leader distance: A review and a proposed theory. The Leadership Quarterly 13(6), 673-704.

Avolio, B. J., & Kahai, S. (2003). Adding the ―e‖ to e-leadership: How it may impact your leadership. Organizational Dynamics, 31(4).

Avolio, B. J., Kahai, S., & Dodge, G. E. (2000). E-leadership: Implications for theory, research, and practice. The Leadership Quarterly, 11(4).



Avolio, B. J., Walumbwa, F. O., & Weber, T. J. (2009). Leadership: Current theories, research, and future directions. Annual Review of Psychology, 60(1), 421-449.

Balthazard, P. A., Waldman, D. A., & Atwater, L. E. (2008). The mediating effects of leadership and interaction style in face-to-face and virtual teams. In S. Weisband (Ed.), Leadership at a distance: Research in technologically supported work (pp. 127–150). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Balthazard, P. A., Waldman, D. A., & Warren, J. E. (2009). Predictors of the emergence of transformational leadership in virtual decision teams. The Leadership Quarterly, 20(5).

Banerjee, P., & Chau, P. Y. K. (2004). An evaluative framework for analysing e-government convergence capability in developing countries. Electronic Government, an International Journal, 1(1), 29-48.

Bishop, A., Riopelle, K., Gluesing, J., Danowski, J., & Eaton, T. (2010). Managing global compliance through collaborative innovation networks. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(4).

Brake, T. (2006). Leading global virtual teams. Industrial and Commercial Training, 38(3).

Bryant, S. M., Albring, S. M., & Murthy, U. (2009). The effects of reward structure, media richness and gender on virtual teams. International Journal of Accounting Information System, 10(4), 190-213.

Carreno, I. G. (2008). E-mentoring and e-leadership importance in the quality of distance and virtual education Century XXI. Paper from m-ICTE 2009: Research, Reflections and Innovations in Integrating ICT in Education. Retrieved from http://www.formatex.org/micte2009/book/728-732.pdf.

Cascio, W. F., & Shurygallo, S. (2003). E-leadership and virtual teams. Organizational Dynamics, 31(4).

Chen, M., Liou, Y., Wang, C.-W., Fan, Y.-W., & Chi, Y.-P. J. (2007). TeamSpirit: Design, implementation, and evaluation of a Web-based group decision support system. Decision Support Systems, 43(4), 1186-1202.

Colfax, R. S., Santos, A. T., & Diego, J. (2009). Virtual leadership: A green possibility in critical times but can it really work? Journal of International Business Research, 8(2).

Danowski, J. A. (2010). Identifying collaborative innovation networks: At the inter-departmental level. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(4), 6404-6417.



Darleen, D. (2009). Virtual success: The keys to effectiveness in leading from a distance. Leadership in Action, 28(6), 9-11.

Davis, D. D. (2004). The Tao of leadership in virtual teams. Organizational Dynamics, 33(1), 47-62.

Dekker, D. M., Rutte, C. G., & Van den Berg, P. T. (2008). Cultural differences in the perception of critical interaction behaviors in global virtual teams. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 32, 441-452.

D'Souza, G. C., & Colarelli, S. M. (2010). Team member selection decisions for virtual versus face-to-face teams. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 630-635.

González-Navarro, P., Orengoa, V., Zornozaa, A., Ripolla, P., & Peiróa, J. M. (2010). Group interaction styles in a virtual context: The effects on group outcomes. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(5), 2558-2580.

Greenberg, P. S., Greenberg, R. H., & Antonucci, Y. L. (2007). Creating and sustaining trust in virtual teams. Business Horizons, 50, 325-333.

Gurr, D. (2004). ICT, leadership in education and e-leadership. Discourse, 25(1), 113-124.

Hambley, L. A., O‘Neill, T. A., & Kline, T. J. B. (2005). Virtual team leadership: The effects of leadership style and communication medium on team interaction styles and outcomes. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 103, 1-20.

Hamilton, B. A., & Scandura, T. A. (2003). E-mentoring: Implications for organizational learning and development in a wired world. Organizational Dynamics, 31(4), 388-402

Hanna, N. K. (2007). e-Leadership institutions for the knowledge economy. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank.

Hart, R. K., & Mcleod, P. L. (2003). Rethinking team building in geographically dispersed teams: One message at a time. Organizational Dynamics, 31(4), 352-361.

Hertel, G., Geister, S., & Konradt, U. (2005). Managing virtual teams: A review of current empirical research. Human Resource Management Review, 15(1), 69-95. Retrieved from http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1053482205000033

Holland, J. B., Malvey, D., & Fottler, M. D. (2009). Health care globalization: A need for virtual leadership. The Health Care Manager (Frederick), 28(2), 117-123.



Howell, J. M., Neufeld, D. J., & Avolio, B. J. (2005). Examining the relationship of leadership and physical distance with business unit performance. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(2), 273-285.

Huang, R., Kahai, S., & Jestice, R. (2010). The contingent effects of leadership on team collaboration in virtual teams. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(5), 1098-1110.

Hunsaker, P. L., & Hunsaker, J. S. (2008). Virtual teams: A leader's guide. Team Performance Management, 14(1/2), 86-101.

Jarvenpaa, S. I., & Tanriverdi, H. (2003). Leading virtual knowledge networks. Organizational Dynamics, 31(4), 403-412.

Kanawattanachai, P., & Yoo, Y. (2002). Dynamic nature of trust in virtual teams. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 11(3), 187-213.

Karpova, E., Correia, A.-P., & Baran, E. (2009). Learn to use and use to learn: Technology in virtual collaboration experience. The Internet and Higher Education, 12(1), 45-52.

Kayworth, T., & Leidner, D. (2000). The global virtual manager: A prescription for success. European Management Journal, 18(2), 183-194.

Keen, P. G. W. (2000). IT's agenda for e-leadership. Computerworld, 34(1), S4-5.

Kerfoot, K. M. (2010). Listening to see: The key to virtual leadership. Nursing Economics, 28(2), 114-115.

Kissler, G. D. (2001). E-leadership. Organizational Dynamics, 30(2), 121-133.

Lee, M. R. (2009). E-ethical leadership for virtual project teams. International Journal of Project Management, 27(5), 456-463.

Lee-Kelley, L., & Sankeya, T. (2008). Global virtual teams for value creation and project success: A case study. International Journal of Project Management, 26(1).

Lin, C., Standing, C., & Liu, Y. C. (2009). A model to develop effective virtual teams. Decision Support Systems, 45(1).

Lin, C.-P., Wang, Y.-J., Tsai, Y.-H., & Hsu, Y.-F. (2010). Perceived job effectiveness in coopetition: A survey of virtual teams within business organizations. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 339-344.



Lunman, R., & Barth, T. (2003). Managing the exploration vs. exploitation dilemma in transnational "bridging teams." Journal of World Business, 38(2), 110-126.

Lurey, J. S., & Raisinghani, M. S. (2001). An empirical study of best practices in virtual teams. Information & Management, 38(8), 523-544.

Luther, K., & Bruckman, A. (2010). Flash collabs: Collaborative innovation networks in online communities of animators. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(4), 6571-6581.

Malhotra, A., Majchrzak, A., & Rosen, B. (2007). Leading virtual teams. Academy Of Management Perspective, 21, 60–70.

May, A., & Carter, C. (2001). A case study of virtual team working in the European automotive industry. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 27(3), 171-186.

Miller, C. Z., Aqeel-Alzrooni, S., & Campbell, R. W. (2010). Learning to collaborate in COINs: Insights from a multidisciplinary global virtual collaboration. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(4), 6543-6550.

Mobley, W. H. (2004). Leadership challenges in Asia. Organizational Dynamics, 33(1), 98-108.

Munkvold, B. E., & Zigurs, E. (2007). Process and technology challenges in swift-starting virtual teams. Information & Management, 44(3), 287-299.

Nauman, S., Khan, A. M., & Ehsan, N. (2009). Patterns of empowerment and leadership style in project environment. International Journal of Project Management, 28, 638-649.

Panteli, N. (2004). Discursive articulations of presence in virtual organizing. Information and Organization, 14(1), 59-81.

Paul, S., Seetharaman, P., Samarah, I., & Mykytyn, P. P. (2004). Impact of heterogeneity and collaborative conflict management style on the performance of synchronous global virtual teams. Information & Management, 41(3), 303-321.

Peña-Mora, F., Hussein, K., Vadhavkar, S., & Benjamin, K. (2000). CAIRO: A concurrent engineering meeting environment for virtual design teams. Artificial Intelligence in Engineering, 14(3).

Petzel, R., Archer, A.-M., & Fei, R. (2010). Collaboration for sustainability in a networked world. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(4), 6597-6609.



Pithon, A. C., Brochado, M. R., Sandonato, F. S., & Teixeira, B. M. (2006). Collaborative analysis among virtual teams: An experience. In D. T. Pham, E. E., Eldukhri, A. J. Soroka (eds.), Intelligent Production Machines and Systems (pp. 113-119). Cardiff, UK: Elsevier, LTD.

Potter, R. E. (2002). Virtual team interaction styles: Assessment and effects. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 56(4), 423-443.

Pulley, M. L., & Sessa, V. I. ('2001). E-leadership: Tackling complex challenges. Industrial and Commercial Training, 33(6/7).

Purvanova, R. K., & Bono, J. E. (2009). Transformational leadership in context: Face-to-face and virtual teams. The Leadership Quarterly, 20(3).

Reed, A. H., & Knight, L. V. (2010). Effect of a virtual project team environment on communication-related project risk. International Journal of Project Management, 28(5).

Rusman, E., Van Bruggen, J., Sloep, P., & Koper, R. (2009). Fostering trust in virtual project teams: Towards a design framework grounded in a trustworthiness antecedents (TWAN) schema. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 68(11), 834-850.

Ryssen, S. V., & Godar, S. H. (2000). Going international without going international: Multinational virtual teams. Journal of International Management, 6, 49-60.

Salomon, J. (2010). Transitioning towards the digital native: Examining digital technologies, video games, and learning. (Doctoral dissertation). ProQuest. (3407254).

Shriberg, A. (2009). Effectively leading and managing a virtual team. The Business Review, 12(2).

Shulman, Richard R. (2001). In search of e-leadership. Supermarket Business,New York: 56(10).

Smits, S. T. (2010). Extending the journey: Leadership development beyond the MBA. The Poznan University of Economics Review, 10(1).

Violina, R. (2009). Integrating diverse knowledge through boundary spanning processes—The case of multidisciplinary project teams. International Journal of Project Management, 27.

Walker, J. W. (2000). E-leadership? Human Resource Planning, 23(1), 5-6.



Walvoord, A. A. G., Redden, E. R., Elliott, L. R., & Coovert, M. D. (2008). Empowering followers in virtual teams: Guiding principles from theory and practice. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(5), 1884-1906.

Watson, K. D. (2007). Remote management: Traditional leadership behaviors in a contemporary work environment. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS.

Workman, M., Kahnweiler, W., & Bommer, W. (2010). The effects of cognitive style and media richness on commitment to telework and virtual teams. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 63(2).

Xiao, Y., Seagull F. J., Mackenzie, C. F., Klein, K. J., & Ziegert, J. (2008). Adaptation of team communication patterns. Exploring the effects of leadership at a distance: Task urgency, and shared team experience. In S. Weisband (Ed.), Leadership at a distance: Research in technologically supported work (pp. 71–96). Mahway, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Yagil, D. (1998). Charismatic leadership and organizational hierarchy: Attribution of charisma to close and distant leaders. The Leadership Quarterly, 9(2).

Yoo, Y., & Alavi, M. (2004). Emergent leadership in virtual teams: What do emergent leaders do? Information and Organization, 14.

Zaccaro, S. J., & Bader, P. (2003). E-leadership and the challenges of leading e-teams: Minimizing the bad and maximizing the good. Organizational Dynamics, 31(4).

Zigurs, I. (2009). Leadership in virtual teams: Oxymoron or opportunity? Organizational Dynamics, 31(4).

Diverse Perspectives on the Groupthink Theory – A Literary Review

James D. Rose Regent University

This article provides a summary of research related to the groupthink theory. The review includes case studies, experimental studies, literature reviews, example applications, and proposed modifications to the groupthink theory. Groupthink has been applied to a broad spectrum of group settings and is seen as a major factor in many poor decisions. Despite close to 40 years of the existence of the groupthink theory, experimental studies are limited with only a few of the model‘s 24 variables adequately tested. Testing limitations, and their mixed experimental results, lead to a wide diversity of perspectives regarding the model. Some conclude groupthink is no better than a myth, while others believe it is a brilliant construct. One recommendation is to address the ambiguity of the model; implementing previously proposed modifications (identified in this article) would achieve this objective. A further recommendation is to increase focus on testing groupthink prevention steps.

Groupthink, a term describing a group where ―loyalty requires each member to avoid raising controversial issues‖ (Janis, 1982, p. 12), ironically is controversial in itself with ―very little consensus among researchers on the validity of the groupthink model‖ (Park, 2000, p. 873). Despite the controversy, since it was first published over three decades ago the groupthink theory has been widely accepted (Mitchell & Eckstein, 2009, p. 164) and the groupthink phenomenon has been found to occur in a far wider range of group settings than originally envisioned (Baron, 2005, p. 219). This article summarizes the groupthink concept and provides an overview of the diversity of views regarding groupthink’s validity. Janis (1972, 1982) and over sixty scholarly peer-reviewed articles provide the basis of this literary review. Identification of the scholarly articles resulted from three approaches: (a) searching for articles in the EBSCO and ABI databases using the term groupthink, (b) identifying key articles featured in a collection of literature reviews published in recognition of the term‘s 25th anniversary (Turner & Pratkanis, 1998b), and (c) through article reference lists. This review identifies key groupthink case studies and experiments, and then follows with the various arguments for and against the groupthink concept. It reviews example applications, identifies proposed modifications to the groupthink concepts, and then concludes with recommendations.

Diverse Perspectives on the Groupthink Theory P a g e | 38

Emerging Leadership Journeys, Vol. 4 Iss. 1, 2011, pp. 37- 57. © 2011 Regent University School of Global Leadership & Entrepreneurship ISSN 1930-806X | [email protected]

The Groupthink Theory

Janis (1982) stated, ―groups bring out the worst as well as the best‖ (p. 3) in terms of decision-making. Janis (1972) developed the groupthink theory based on assessment of some of the worst decisions or ―fiascos‖ (p. 1). These fiascos include the Bay of Pigs, the Pearl Harbor attack, the North Korea escalation, and the Vietnam escalation. Janis tested the theory against two decisions where groupthink was absent (the Marshall plan and the Cuban missile crisis).

The Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary (2010) defined groupthink as ―a pattern of thought characterized by self-deception, forced manufacture of consent, and conformity to group values and ethics.‖ However, for the purposes of this article, a scholarly definition is used. Janis (1982) defined groupthink as ―a mode of thinking people engage in when they are deeply involved in a cohesive in-group, when the members striving for unanimity override their motivation to realistically appraise alternative courses of action‖ (p. 9). Janis modeled groupthink as certain antecedent conditions, which lead to concurrence seeking (or groupthink tendency), which results in observable consequences, yielding a low probability of a successful outcome.

Janis (1982) defined these variables using examples, as listed below. Note that shorthand labels provided by Janis are shown to help distinguish between the variables (these labels are shown in parentheses following the variable name). Janis indicated there are three types of antecedent conditions: cohesion of the group (A), organizational structural faults (B1), and situational factors (B2). For organizational structural faults, Janis provided four examples: insulation of the group (B1-1), lack of impartial leadership (B1-2), lack of methodical procedure group norms (B1-3), and homogeneity of group members (B1-4). Example situational factors include high stress from external threats (B2-1) and temporary low self-esteem (B2-2) induced by recent failures, excessive difficulties, or moral dilemmas.

For observable consequences, Janis (1982) included two categories: symptoms of groupthink (C) and symptoms of defective decision-making (D). For symptoms of groupthink, Janis listed eight symptoms grouped into three types:

Type I, overestimation of the group, including 1) illusion of invulnerability (C-1), and, 2) belief in group‘s inherent morality (C-2);

Type II, closed mindedness, including 3) collective rationalization (C-3), and, 4) stereotypes of out-groups (C-4);

Type III, pressure toward uniformity, including 5) self censorship (C-5), 6) illusion unanimity (C-6),

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/group



7) direct pressure on dissenters (C-7), and, 8) self-appointed mind guards (C-8).

Janis (1982) provided seven symptoms of defective decision-making, including: incomplete survey of alternatives (D-1), incomplete survey of objectives (D-2), failure to examine risks (D-3), failure to reappraise rejected alternatives (D-4), poor information search (D-5), selective bias in processing information (D-6), and failure to work out a contingency plan (D-7).

Identification of groupthink frequently only occurs after the occurrence of a problem or a fiasco. ―The paradox of groupthink is that unanimous decisions may be seen to be a display of resoluteness, when, in fact, they result from defense avoidance on the part of the individual members of the decision group‖ (Rosenthal & ‗t Hart, 1991, p. 361). Janis (1982) provided observable symptoms, allowing identification of the risk of groupthink and the opportunity to prevent.

Perhaps more important to identifying symptoms, Janis (1982) also provided nine recommendations designed to prevent groupthink from occurring (pp. 262-271). A summary of these prevention recommendations follows:

1. Each member should be a critical evaluator of the group‘s course of action; an open climate of giving and accepting criticism should be encouraged by the leader.

2. Leaders should be impartial and refrain from stating personal preferences at the outset of group discussion; they should limit themselves initially to fostering open inquiry.

3. Establish multiple groups with different leaders to work the question in parallel. 4. Split groups into subgroups to assess feasibility and effectiveness of proposals. 5. Each member of the group should privately discuss current issues and options

with trusted associates outside the group and report reactions. 6. From time to time, bring in outside experts to challenge the views of the core

members. 7. There should be one or more devil‘s advocates during every group meeting. 8. In conflict situations, extra time should be devoted to interpreting warning

signals from rivals and to constructing alternative scenarios of their intentions. 9. Reconsider the decision in second chance meetings before going public.

The Janis (1982) groupthink model includes various elements—namely, the antecedent conditions [cohesion (A), structural faults (B1), and situational factors (B2)], symptoms of groupthink (C), symptoms of defective decision-making, (D) and prevention recommendations (not labeled by Janis). The articles summarized in this review provide a scholarly contribution to understanding, improving, and/or applying at least one of the elements of the groupthink model.



Scholarly Studies

The following sections provide a summary of over 60 scholarly articles written on groupthink since Janis (1972). Tables 1, 2, and 3 summarize case studies. Tables 4 and 5 summarize experimental studies. Subsequent sections cover groupthink literature reviews, applications, and modifications.

Case Studies

A diverse variety and growing number of case studies have applied the groupthink theory. Tables 1, 2, and 3 summarize 17 case studies covering different types of decisions for various types of groups. Some of the cases review political and military decisions similar to cases Janis (1972, 1982) evaluated, such as the Son Tay prisoner rescue attempt (Amidon, 2005). The breadth of application continues to expand. Case studies have been completed on organization decisions, such as the baseball umpire decision to strike in 1999 (Koerber & Neck, 2003), and have also assessed organization strategy (Eaton, 2001) and Worldcom‘s fraudulent behavior (Scharff, 2005). Each of the case studies reviewed found evidence of groupthink.

Table 1 Case Studies based on Groupthink (Multiple Elements) - one or Two Decision Cases

Author (date) Case Methodology

Elements Reviewed Results

Koerber & Neck (2003)

1999 baseball umpire strike

Review of periodicals. B1, C (3 of 8) & D (6 of 7) & Whyte 1998 model

Groupthink and Whyte conditions prevalent. Indicated groupthink can be applicable to larger groups (McCauley, 1998).

Yetiv (2003)

Gulf Crisis (‘90-‘91, Kuwait)

Not described, quotes various sources (high-level review).

All elements Evidence of groupthink but positive outcome. Weak arguments.

Kramer (1998)

Bay of Pigs, Vietnam decisions

Review of declassified documents

Various elements

Evidence of political implications, not necessarily groupthink.

Hensley & Griffin (1986)

Kent State University gymnasium controversy

Review of minutes of Kent State meetings, interviews, & news articles.

A, B1, B2, C, & D

Significant evidence of groupthink. Recommended revising board selection process.

Note. A=Cohesion, B1= Structural faults (1 to 4), B2=Situation context (1 to 2c), C=Groupthink symptoms (1 to 8), D=Defective decision-making symptoms (1 to 7).

Most of the studies used an approach similar to that used by Janis (1972, 1982). However, Esser and Lindoerfer (1989) used a more rigorous content analysis, using



quantitative coding to count the various positive and negative accounts of groupthink. Tetlock, Peterson, McGuire, Chang, and Feld (1992) used GDQS (Group dynamics Q Sort) and LISREL.

The case studies in Table 3 apply only a subset of the Janis (1982) groupthink model, the groupthink symptoms. For example, Ahlstrom and Wang (2009) completed a study using the groupthink model to assess France‘s defeat by Germany in 1940. They essentially limited their assessment to only the groupthink symptoms and did not address other elements of the groupthink theory. Nevertheless, based on redundant sources (which they used to ensure validity), Ahlstrom and Wang conclude groupthink ―contributed significantly‖ to failures of the French to prepare for Germany‘s attack (p. 173).

Table 2 Case Studies based on Multiple Decisions



Schafer & Crichlow (2002)

33 international decisions

Review of multiple data sources and expert assessment

B1 (& other factors)

Supports importance of B1 factors.

Choi & Kim (1999)

30 ―crises‖ in organizations

Survey team members A, C & D Results indicated partial support. Included other factors, weakens validity as groupthink test.

Tetlock et al. (1992)

10 Decisions (Janis cases)

Content analysis. GDQSa & LISREL

Groupthink concept

GDQS results supported Janis work, LISREL less so. B1 & B2-1 predictive.

Moorhead et al. (1991)

Challenger accident

Review of accident report.

A, B1, & C (8 of 8)

Evidence of all factors. Recommended time and leadership style be added to model.

Esser & Lindoedfer (1989)

Challenger Accident

Review of incident report using coding.

Attempted to do all, but data limited.

Found twice as many positive groupthink instances than negative.

Herek et al. (1987)

19 interna-tional crises

Review of bibliographic sources. Expert reviews.

D (7 of 7) Demonstrated low quality process correlates with negative outcomes.

Note. A=Cohesion, B1= Structural faults (1 to 4), B2=Situation context (1 to 2c), C=Groupthink symptoms (1 to 8), D=Defective decision-making symptoms (1 to 7). aGDQS=Group Dynamics Q Sort.



Table 3 Case Studies based on Groupthink Symptoms, One or Two Decisions



Ahlstrom & Wang (2009)

France‘s 1940 WWII defeat

Detailed document review with rigorous redundancy check for validity.

C (8 of 8) Found evidence of all symptoms. Concluded groupthink was key factor in defeat.

Amidon (2005)

Son Tay Rescure attempt

Documents not referenced (high-level review).

C (8 of 8) Evidence of all eight symptoms.

Green et al. (2005)

1994 F-16 & C-130 crash

Not described, quoted various reports (high-level review).

C (8 of 8) Evidence of all eight symptoms. No ―remedies‖ in place.

Dimitroff et al. (2005)

Challenger & Columbia accidents


C (5 of 8) Symptoms were present in both cases.

Scharff (2005)

Worldcom Fraud

Approach & references not documented (high-level review).

C (7 of 8) Concluded groupthink ―helps explain some issues & fraudulent activities.‖

Maier (2002)

Challenger accident


C (2 of 8) Two conditions not groupthink, therefore ―not groupthink.‖

Eaton (2001)

BA and Marks & Spencer strategy

Content analysis of press releases.

C (8 of 8)

Evidence of groupthink in all eight areas.

Smith (1984)

Iran Hostage Crisis

Document review (high-level review).

C (8 of 8) Evidence of all symptoms, groupthink a contributor to poor decision.


Experimental Studies

There are fifteen studies identified as experiments on groupthink elements. The typical study selects subjects (often students) and puts them in groups of three to six. The groups then complete some kind of decision task, usually in 20 to 40 minutes. Questionnaires are completed initially and/or after the decision task. In addition to an assessment of the outcome of the decision task, video or audio tapes of the decision meeting are analyzed. In ten of the 15 cases, a limited number of variables or elements



(a subset of the model) are tested (Table 4). The remaining studies attempt to test essentially the full groupthink model (Table 5).

Table 4 Experimental Studies Assessing a Subset of the Groupthink model

Author (date)

Elements / Assumptionsa

Methodology / Design Results Other Comments

Erdem (2003)

Groupthink (as concept) & trust relationship.

142 participants in 28 teams from 7 firms. Surveys.

Having high degree of trust increases risk of groupthink.

Surveys limited, questions not tied to elements.

Ahlfinger & Esser (2001)

B1-2 (promotional leadership), C, D.

459 students, 16 groups. Black bear & groupthink index.

Partial support for B1-2, influenced 4 of 15 elements of C+D, statistically significant.

Built on Callaway (1985). Identified groupthink index reliability issue.

Hodson & Sorrentino (1997)

A, B1-3 201 students, 68 groups (ad hoc). Typical approachb.

A (as defined) irrelevant. B1-3 supported.

Found uncertainty analysis plays role.

Bernthal & Insko (1993)

A (task & social emotional), C

138 students, 46 groups (ad hoc), decision exercise, created conflict.

High social emotional cohesion related to groupthink but not high task.

Results supported narrowing definition of cohesion.

Callaway (1985)

B1-2 (dominance), B1-3,

120 students, 28 groups, typical approachb.

Dominant members im-proved decision making. Procedures affect limited.

Other variables tested.

Leana (1985)

A, B1-2 (directive, participative), Causal ordering.

208 students, 52 groups (15 week history), typical approachb (20 min sessions).

Directive leaders provided support for B1.2. Cohesion results did not support A.

Procedures (B1.3) ―controlled‖, but no mention of norms previously established.

Callaway (1984)

A & B1-3 128 students, 32 groups (ad hoc), Typical approachb, with two exercises.

Support for A Characterized groupthink as lack of disagreement.

Fodor & Smith (1982)

A & B1-3 (leader power), D1

200 students, 40 groups (ad hoc). Typical approachb.

No decision quality relationship to A. Low power leader improved group participation.

Decision quality measured by D1 related traits.

Courtright (1978)

A & B1-3 96 students. Typical approachb (25 min session).

Results not significant. Stated Janis defined ―a probabilistic relationship‖

Flowers (1977)

A & B1-3 (leader openness).

160 participants, 40 groups. Typical approachb (30 min sessions).

Results support B1-3, but not A.

Cohesion only through acquaintances



Note. A=Cohesion; B1= Structural faults (1 to 4); B2=Situation context (1 to 2c); C=Groupthink symptoms (1 to 8); D=Defective decision-making symptoms (1 to 7). aBased on variable model unless noted. bTypical approach: Decision exercise, questionnaires, taped sessions.

Well-tested variables. There are three variables in groupthink that have had a significant number of experiments: cohesion (A), insulation (B1-3), and impartial leadership (B1-2). Generally, tests of impartial leadership have consistently supported the groupthink model. As shown in Table 4, lower-power leaders (Fodor & Smith, 1982), open-leaders (Flowers, 1977), and non-directive leaders (Leana, 1985) have all been shown to facilitate option generation and discussion (measures that demonstrate the absence of groupthink). Research has found that insulation reduces decision quality (Moorhead & Montanari, 1986).

Table 5 Experimental Studies Assessing Multiple Elements of the Groupthink Model

Author (date)

Elements / Assumptionsa

Methodology / Design Results Other Comments

Park (2000) A, B1, B2, C, D (24 variables). Causal ordering.

256 students, 64 groups (ad hoc). Role play, video, Questionnaires.

Partial support: 10 of 24 variables. (4 of 8 A, 4 of 8 C, 4 of 7 D). Indicated ―partial mediators.‖

Developed questionnaire covering all 24 variables.

Hogg & Hains (1998)

A, B, C, D 472 students, 118 groups. Typical approachb. Half groups were friends.

Friendship negatively related to group identification.

Provided basis for better defining cohesion.

Kroon et al. (1992)

A, B, C, D, as well as accountability

171 students, 44 groups. Typical approachb.

Experiment inconclusive regarding accountability. Found gender may have impact.

Demonstrated difficulty of testing groupthink.

Turner et al. (1992)

A, B, C (5 of 8), D (7 of 7)

180 students, 60 groups, Typical approachb times two.

Support for groupthink, including A, when linked to social identity and high threat.

Rigorous assess-ment. Defined where applicable.

Moorhead & Montanari (1986)

A, B (2 of 8), C (7 of 8), D (4 of 7). Combined 11 elements to 5. Causal ordering.

197 subjects. 45 teams (3 mth relationships). Typical approachb.

Supported A, B, C & D. Strongest support found for insulation.

Combining elements makes comparison to other studies difficult.



Note. A=Cohesion, B1= Structural faults (1 to 4), B2=Situation context (1 to 2c), C=Groupthink symptoms (1 to 8), D=Defective decision-making symptoms (1 to 7). aBased on variable model unless noted. bTypical approach = Decision exercise, questionnaires, taped sessions.

The last area, group cohesion, has had mixed results and has frequently not been found to be associated with groupthink. One reason for the mixed results is there are varying approaches to operationalizing cohesion (Hogg & Hains, 1998, p. 325), as Janis did not provide the aspects of cohesion considered. As such, experimenters have tested cohesion from a diversity of perspectives. For example, Bernthal and Insko (1993) evaluated cohesion from a social emotional perspective, whereas Hogg and Hains (1998) evaluated a friendship basis. Different still, Tetlock et al. (1992) defined cohesion as well-defined and shared goals.

Test of the full model. Table 5 lists five studies attempting to test a large portion of the model. Park (2000) conducted the most ambitious investigation, attempting to assess all 24 variables of the groupthink model (p. 873). The test assumed a sequential relationship among the elements of the model and measured the relative contribution of the various elements (p. 875). Sixty-four four-person teams completed a 50-minute decision-making exercise designed to simulate a ―complex non-routine dilemma‖ (p. 875). As noted, there was ―no real consequence‖ of the group‘s decision-making (p. 885). The study provides only partial support of Janis‘ model (p. 883), with predictions ―confirmed in only two of twenty-three cases‖ (p. 873).

Other issues. The issue of operationalizing the groupthink theory goes beyond cohesion, as most groupthink variables are not well defined. According to Moorhead and Montanari (1986), of the 24 variables, ―group cohesiveness was the only variable of which a published measure was available‖ (p. 402). Experimenters have, therefore, had to develop measures and frequently have chosen unique approaches; no consensus exists on how to operationalize antecedents and how to measure the other variables (Esser, 1998, p. 325). The lack of standardization makes it difficult to compare or combine study results.

In addition to these issues, there is difficultly orchestrating the kind of cohesive group dynamics Janis‘ (1982) model described. For example, many studies (see Tables 4 and 5) have used ad hoc groups. Ad hoc groups have limited cohesion amongst the group members (Park, 2000, p. 885).

Lastly, despite almost 40 years of existence, the Janis model (1982) has many elements with only limited experimental testing. As shown in Table 5, cohesion (A) and impartial leadership (B1-3) have had a reasonable number of tests. However, the remaining 21 variables have had limited testing. As such, testing of the model is at best inconclusive (Ahlfinger & Esser, 2001, p. 32).



Various Perspectives – For and Against

Table 6 summarizes two literary reviews of the groupthink model. These reviews provide a reasonably balanced view of the state of scholarly thinking at the time. Esser (1998) indicated that case studies have confirmed the model, but both reviews noted the lack of experimental validation of the model. The lack of conclusive evidence, either for or against, has led to a diversity of perspectives.

Despite the diversity of perspectives and the limited empirical support, the groupthink concept continues to see broad application. As can be seen on Table 7, groupthink has been applied to juries (Mitchell & Eckstein, 2009) and hockey teams (Rovio, Eskola, Kozub, Duda, & Lintunen, 2009). Ko (2005) described how Chinese culture affects groupthink. Shmidt, Zopalaski and Toole (2005) assessed the interface between strength of relationships and groupthink. Klein and Stern (2009) drew an interesting parallel between groupthink and academia.

Table 6 Groupthink Literature Reviews Articles

Author (date) Articles Covered Summary

Esser (1998)

Janis (1972, 1982). 16 case studies, 11 laboratory studies.

10 confirmed groupthink cases. 5 confirmed ―vigilant‖ cases. Group cohesion not supported (when viewed as mutual attraction). Too few laboratory studies to be conclusive regarding total model, and variables operationalized in a wide variety of ways. Structural faults (B1) generally predictive.

Park (1990)

16 empirical studies, 7 experimental, 9 qualitative.

Limited number of variables tested, 4 of 8 groupthink symptoms (C), even less of others. Found studies often using poor ―modes of measurement‖ – provided recommended approach.


Those For

During groupthink‘s 25th year, several articles were written regarding the status of the groupthink model. The following articles provide support for the model in addition to Esser‘s (1998) literature review. Paulus (1998) stated that the ―model represents a brilliant construction founded in part on the existing group dynamics literature‖ (p. 371). Raven (1998) ―hope[d] the work by Janis and his followers [would] sensitize policy makers and other decision groups about what they might do to counter the effects of groupthink‖ (p. 360). Raven further stated, ―by and large, the basic principles of groupthink theory have still held strong‖ (p. 359). More recently, Packer (2009) added, ―Longstanding psychological explanations refer to groupthink‖ (p. 546).



Those Against

The groupthink model also has its critics. Baron (2005) stated that after many years of investigation, evidence ―has largely failed to support the formulation‘s more ambitious and controversial predictions‖ (p. 219). Henningsen, Henningsen, Eden, and Cruz (2006) added, ―Questions can be raised as to the utility of using groupthink theory for research‖ (p. 62). Fuller and Aldag (1998) argued, ‗‗in our view, groupthink is a compelling myth. Like other myths, it tells of things that never were but always are. . . . How did we come to so widely and gladly accept it in the absence of compelling evidence?‘‘ (p. 177).

One reason some of these authors are against the groupthink model is they advocate replacing the model. For example, Aldag and Fuller (1993) proposed a comprehensive group problem solving approach. Fuller and Aldag (1998) would like researchers to ―shake off the limiting characteristics of the groupthink model‖ (p. 181). Henningsen et al. (2006) argued groupthink is two processes, a compliance process and a reinforcing process (p. 39).

Other Applications

Despite the diversity of perspectives and the limited empirical support, the groupthink concept continues to see broad application. As can be seen on Table 7, groupthink has been applied to juries (Mitchell & Eckstein, 2009) and hockey teams (Rovio, Eskola, Kozub, Duda, & Lintunen, 2009). Ko (2005) describes how Chinese culture affects groupthink. Shmidt, Zopalaski and Toole (2005) have assessed the interface between strength of relationships and groupthink. Klein and Stern (2009) draw an interesting parallel between groupthink and academia.

Table 7 Applications of Groupthink

Author (date)

Application Area Elements Application Other

Broad Application

Mitchell & Eckstein (2009)

Jury decision making

A, B1, B2, C

Qualitative assessment based on scholarly literature, including two case studies on jury decisions (Neck 1992, Schafer 1996).

Concludes juries have risk of groupthink, recommends mitigation steps.

Rovio (2009)

Ice Hockey Team Performance

A and group-think concept

Correlated cohesion / groupthink with team performance.

Did not refer to remedies, recommended limiting cohesion.



Klein & Stern (2009)

Academia (wider group)

A, B1, C Theoretical Academia breeding form of groupthink.

Ko (2005) Implications of Chinese cultureon groupthink

C (8 of 8) Qualitative assessment, Hong Kong focus group. 5 factor questionnaire.

View of ―status‖ in high social status groups increases groupthink risk.

Shmidt, et al. (2005)

Relative to LMX

All with focus on C.

Empirical study using LMX & bipolar group-think questionnaire (Rosander et al. 1989)

In-group members engaging in omni-potent (Janis-type) groupthink.

Use of General Concept

Karpowitz & Raphael (2009)

Civic Groups General concept

Enclave deliberation (innovative civic forum) reduces groupthink.

Result is group sees diverse perspectives.

Maharaj (2007, 2008)

Board member characteristics

General concept

Theoretical; argues for individual board member assessment including groupthink characteristics.

Prevent groupthink by adjusting board selection.

Solomon (2006)

Group deliberation

General concept

Theoretical. Use of ―crowd‖ approach to prevent groupthink

―Group deliberation useless unless structured‖.

Note. A=Cohesion, B1= Structural faults (1 to 4), B2=Situation context (1 to 2c), C=Groupthink symptoms (1 to 8) D=Defective decision-making symptoms (1 to 7).

Many additional articles reference the groupthink concept; Table 7 shows a few examples. An interesting example is Maharaj‘s (2007, 2008) application of groupthink to board member roles. Maharaj suggested one characteristic of board members is whether or not they possess groupthink tendencies, indicating that board members who engage in discussion, ask probing questions, and take an independent view do not have groupthink tendencies. Maharaj advocated for board member selection and annual performance appraisals to include an assessment of groupthink tendencies.

Modifications of Groupthink

A wide array of modifications has been proposed for the groupthink model, as summarized in Table 8. Of these ten proposals, three appear constructive and operational, and five address cohesion. The next two sections summarize these proposals. The remaining three articles, Chapman (2006), Flippen (1999), and Neck and Moorhead (1995), propose incorporating additional variables into the groupthink model.



Constructive Proposals

The initial section of Table 8 lists three constructive and sufficiently defined proposals, ready for application and testing. ‗t Hart‘s (1998) article characterized various types of decisions and made a case that groupthink should only be applied to ―problem solving‖ decisions and not other types of decisions (such as those driven by political factors). ‘t Hart, as well as Mohamed and Weibe (1996), advocated for adding accountability to the list of prevention steps. Rosander, Stiwne and Granstrom (1998) developed a tool for assessing groupthink tendencies.

Mohamed and Weibe (1996) advocated that groupthink is a process model. They make the argument that many of the experimental tests have failed because the researchers are assuming a causal order variance model. Other articles also support this process approach; for example, Courtright (1978) stated that Janis specifies ―a probabilistic relationship‖ versus the causal order assumed by many (see Tables 4 & 5).

It appears the assumption that groupthink is a causal ordering variance model resulted from a Janis (1982) figure that implies a causal order. However, Janis stated, ―even when some symptoms are absent, others may be so pronounced that we can expect all the unfortunate consequences‖ (p. 175). This statement supports a process versus variance approach.

Table 8 Proposed Groupthink Model Improvements

Author (date) Area of Improvement Proposed Improvement Comments

Constructive and Operational Proposals

‘t Hart (1998)

Specify when groupthink applicable

Limit groupthink to ―problem solving‖ decision (e.g., where logic can trump politics).

Proposed adding accountability as prevention step.

Rosander et al. (1998)

Need to describe variations in groupthink.

Proposed bipolar groupthink, omnipotent (Janis type), and depressive. Developed tool for assessing.

Questionnaire is tool to assess risk of groupthink in organization. Study applied to six organizations.

Mohamed & Weibe (1996)

How to achieve more conclusive results from empirical investigations.

Groupthink should be tested as a process versus a variance model. Theorizes accountability will mitigate groupthink risk.

Recommended improvements in research approach by operationalizing construct and not using ad hoc groups.



Options for Addressing Cohesion

Baron (2005)

Improve antecedent conditions.

Proposed ubiquity model replaces social identification with efficacy.

Discussed theoretically. Needs to be mapped.

McCauley (1998)

Groupthink likely in large groups. Criticism of ideas threat to group.

Replace cohesion with desire to maintain ―friendly relations.‖

Discussed theoretically. Needs to be mapped. Larger group observation can be tested.

Turner & Pratkanis (1998a)

Theorized result of protecting collective identity instead of cohesion.

Include SIM (social identity maintenance) in model (consistent with particularistic interpretation of groupthink).

Discussed theoretically. Referenced prior cases as evidence. Needs to be mapped.

Whyte (1998)

Issues with cohesion may be due to collective efficacy.

Replace cohesion with collective efficacy and three related factors.

Uses prior cases as evidence. Proposed revised model, allows for testing.

McCauley (1989)

Compliance as factor. Distinguish between internalization (cohesion) and compliance when testing.


Other Proposals

Chapman (2006)

Role of Anxiety. Incorporate defense modes. Mapped defense modes to symptoms.

Flippen (1999)

Incorporate motivational aspects.

Combine with self-regulatory model of motivation.


Neck & Moorhead (1995)

Better match research results.

Include time pressures, leadership, & procedures.

Used Bay of Pigs to illustrate model.

Note. Needs to be mapped = theoretical basis needs to be mapped into groupthink model such that it can be tested.

Options for Addressing Cohesion

As mentioned earlier, experimental results are mixed regarding cohesion; therefore, several model adjustments have been proposed to address the cohesion issue. Baron (2005) proposed replacing social identification (a type of cohesion) with efficacy; Whyte (1998) offered a related proposal. Turner and Pratkanis (1998a) proposed incorporating a social identity maintenance model. Others suggested narrowing the definition of cohesion; for example, McCauley (1998) advocated for defining cohesion as ―friendly relations.‖ McCauley (1989) also argued to distinguish internalization from compliance testing.



Conclusion

Janis (1972, 1982) defined the groupthink model to describe a potential downside that groups face where conformity pressure can lead to defective decision-making. Janis specified symptoms of groupthink and steps groups can take to prevent groupthink. Researchers have completed many case studies where groupthink appears to factor into poor decisions. It appears groupthink occurs across a wide spectrum of groups. Experimental results, however, are limited and at best give mixed results. A key question is whether groupthink is a myth (Fuller & Aldag, 1998) or whether improved experimental approaches will validate the model.

Mohamed and Wiebe (1996) advocated, ―the nature of the theory is still unclear. This ambiguity represents a major barrier to theory testing‖ (p.417). Addressing this ambiguity appears to be a reasonable step. A common framework is key to moving toward experimentally validating the groupthink model. Therefore, the first recommendation is defining the theory based on the research to date; this would allow testing of the theory. The second recommendation is to address groupthink by answering the following questions: Is it a process model, as suggested by Mohamed & Wiebe (1996)? Is it a risk mitigation approach (Mitchell & Eckstein, 2009, p. 164)? What are the best instruments to measure the variables?

Turner and Pratkanis (1998c) indicated that Janis was interested in the practical significance of research (p. 104). In this vein, testing Janis‘ (1982) recommended steps to prevent groupthink should also be a priority. The scarcity of research in this area is ―startling‖ (Neck & Moorehead, 1995, p. 538).

About the Author

James D. Rose has worked in various leadership positions within a major international integrated oil and gas company for more than thirty years in many different countries. He is founder and president of the Christian Development Foundation, an organization facilitating leadership education and development, primarily in Africa. This article has been written as part of a doctoral program at the School of Global Leadership & Entrepreneurship at Regent University, Virginia Beach, Virginia. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to James D. Rose [Email: [email protected]].

References

Ahlfinger, N. R., & Esser, J. K. (2001). Testing the groupthink model: Effects of promotional leadership and conformity predisposition. Social Behavior & Personality, 29, 31-41.



Ahlstrom, D., & Wang, L. C. (2009). Groupthink and France‘s defeat in the 1940 campaign. Journal of Management History, 15 (2), 159-177.

Aldag, R. J., & Fuller, S. R. (1993). Beyond fiasco: A reappraisal of the groupthink phenomenon and a new model of group decision processes. Psychological Bulletin, 113, 533–552.

Amidon, M. (2005). Groupthink, politics, and the decision to attempt the Son Tay rescue. Parameters, 2005, 119-131.

Baron, R. S. (2005). So right its wrong: Groupthink and the ubiquitous nature of polarized group decision making. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 219-253.

Bernthal, P. R., & Insko, C. A. (1993). Cohesiveness without groupthink: The interactive effects of social and task cohesion. Group and Organizational Management, 18, 66–87.

Callaway, M. R., & Esser, J. K. (1984). Groupthink: Effects of cohesiveness and problem-solving procedures on group decision making. Social Behavior and Personality, 12, 157–164.

Callaway, M. R., Marriott, R. G., & Esser, J. K. (1985). Effects of dominance on group decision making: Toward a stress-reduction explanation of groupthink. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 949–952.

Chapman, J. (2006). Anxiety and defective decision making: An elaboration of the groupthink model. Management Decision, 44(10), 1391-1404.

Choi, J. N., & Kim, M. U. (1999). The organizational application of groupthink and its limitations in organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 297-306.

Courtright, J. A. (1978). A laboratory investigation of groupthink. Communication Monographs, 45, 229–246.

Dimitroff, R. D., Schmidt, L. A., & Bond, T. D. (2005). Organizational behavior and disaster: A study of conflict at NASA. Project Management Journal, 36(1), 28-38.

Eaton, J. (2001). Management communication: the threat of groupthink. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 6(4), 183-192.

Erdem, F. (2003). Optimal trust and teamwork: from groupthink to teamthink. Work Study, 52(5), 229-233.



Esser, J. K. (1998). Alive and well after 25 years: A review of groupthink research. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 73, 116–141.

Esser, J. K., & Lindoerfer, J. L. (1989). Group think and the space shuttle Challenger accident: Towards a quantitative case analysis. Journal of Behavioral Decision-Making, 2, 167–177.

Flippen, A. R. (1999). Understanding groupthink from a self-regulatory perspective. Small Group Research, 30, 139-165.

Flowers, M. L. (1977). A laboratory test of some implications of Janis‘s groupthink hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 888–896.

Fodor, E. M., & Smith, T. (1982). The power motive as an influence on group decision-making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 178–185.

Fuller, S. R., & Aldag, R. J. (1998). Organizational tonypandy: Lessons from a quarter-century of the groupthink phenomenon. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 73, 163–184.

Green, G., Lee, J. C., & McCalman, D. G. (2005). Formula for catastrophe: Groupthink and groupshift. The Business Review, 4(1), 44-51.

Groupthink. (2010). In Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. Retrieved July 25, 2010, from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/groupthink

Henningsen, D. D., Henningsen, M. L. M., Eden, J., & Cruz, M.G. (2006). Examining the symptoms of groupthink and retrospective sensemaking. Small Group Research, 37(1), 36-64.

Hensley, T. R., & Griffin, G. W. (1986). Victims of groupthink: The Kansas State University Board of Trustees and the 1977 gymnasium controversy. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 30, 497–531.

Herek, G. M., Janis, I. L., & Huth, P. (1987). Decision-making during international crises: Is quality of process related to outcome? Journal of Conflict Resolution, 31, 203–226.

Hodson, G., & Sorrentino, R. M. (1997). Groupthink and uncertainty orientation: Personality differences in reactivity to the group situation. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 1, 144–155.

Hogg, M. A., & Hains, S. C. (1998). Friendship and group identification: A new look at the role of cohesiveness in groupthink. European Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 323–341.



Janis, I. L. (1972). Victims of groupthink. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Janis, I. L. (1982). Groupthink (2nd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Janis, I. L. & Mann, L. (1977). Decision making: A psychological analysis of conflict, choices, and commitment. New York: Free Press.

Karpowitz, C. F., Raphael, C., & Hammond, A. S., IV (2009). Deliberative democracy and inequality: Two cheers for enclave deliberation among the disempowered. Politics and Society, 37(4), 576-615.

Klein, D. B., & Stern, C. (2009). Groupthink in academia – Majoritarian departmental politics and the professional pyramid. The Independent Review, 13(4), 1086-1653.

Ko, A. S. O. (2005). Organizational communications in Hong Kong: a cultural approach to groupthink. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 10(4), 351-357.

Koerber, C. P., & Neck, C. P. (2003). Groupthink and sports: an application of Whyte‘s model. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 15(1), 20-28.

Kramer, R. M. (1998). Revisiting the Bay of Pigs and Vietnam decisions 25 years later: How well has the groupthink hypothesis stood the test of time? Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 73, 236–271.

Kroon, M. B. R., van Kreveld, D., & Rabbie, J. M. (1992). Group versus individual decision making: Effects of accountability and gender on groupthink. Small Group Research, 23, 427–458.

Leana, C. R. (1985). A partial test of Janis‘ groupthink model: Effects of group cohesiveness and leader behavior on defective decision-making. Journal of Management, 11, 5–17.

Maharaj, R. (2007). Corporate governance, groupthink and bullies in the boardroom. International Journal of Disclosure and Governance, 5(1), 69-92.

Maharaj, R. (2008). Corporate governance decision-making model: How to nominate skilled board members, by addressing the formal and informal systems. International Journal of Disclosure and Governance, 6(2), 106-126.

Maier, M. (2002). Ten years after a major malfunction . . . reflections on ―the Challenger syndrome.‖ Journal of Management Inquiry, 11(3), 282-292.

McCauley, C. (1989). The nature of social influence and groupthink: Compliance and internalization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 250–260.



McCauley, C. (1998). Group dynamics in Janis‘s theory of groupthink: Backward and forward. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 73, 142–162.

Mitchell, D. H., Eckstein, D. (2009). Jury dynamics and decision-making; A prescription for groupthink. International Journal of Academic Research, 1(1), 163-169.

Mohamed, A. A., & Wiebe, F. A. (1996). Toward a process theory of groupthink. Small Group Research, 27(3), 416-430.

Moorhead, G., Ference, R., & Neck, C. P. (1991). Group decision fiascoes continue: Space shuttle Challenger and a revised groupthink framework. Human Relations, 44, 539–550.

Moorhead, G., & Montanari, J. R. (1986). An empirical investigation of the groupthink phenomenon. Human Relations, 39, 399–410.

Neck, C. P., & Moorhead, G. (1995). Groupthink remodeled: The importance of leadership, time pressure, and methodical decision-making procedures. Human Relations, 48, 537–557.

Packer, D. J. (2009). Avoiding Groupthink – Whereas weakly identified members remain silent, strongly identified members dissent about collective problems [Short Report], Psychological Science, 20(5), 546-548.

Park, W. (1990). A review of research on groupthink. Journal of Behavioral Decision-making, 3, 229–245.

Park, W. (2000). A comprehensive empirical investigation of the relationships among variables of the groupthink model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21, 873–887.

Paulus, P. B. (1998). Developing consensus about groupthink after all these years. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 73, 362–374.

Raven, B. (1998). Groupthink, Bay of Pigs, and Watergate reconsidered. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 73, 352–361.

Rosander, M., Stiwne, D., & Granstrom, K. (1998). ―Bipolar groupthink‖: Assessing groupthink tendencies in authentic work groups. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 39, 81-92.

Rosenthal, U., & ‘t Hart, P. (1991). Experts and decision makers in crisis situations. Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization, 12(4), 350-372.



Rovio, E., Eskola, J., Kozub, S. A., Duda, J. L., & Lintunen, T. (2009). Can high group cohesion be harmful? A case study of a junior ice-hockey team. Small Group Research, 40(4), 421-435.

Schafer, M. & Crichlow, S. (2002). The process-outcome connection in foreign policy decision making: A quantitative study building on groupthink. International Studies Quarterly, 46, 45-68.

Scharff, M. M. (2005). Understanding Worldcom‘s accounting fraud: Did groupthink play a role? Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 11(4), 109-118.

Shmidt, Jr., J. L., Zapalski, C., & Toole, J. (2005). The relationship between intragroup dichotomization and bipolar groupthink. The Journal of Applied Management and Entrepreneurship, 10(2), 35-57.

Smith, S. (1984). Groupthink and the hostage rescue mission. British Journal of Political Science, 15, 453–458.

Solomon, M. (2006). Groupthink versus the wisdom of crowds: The social epistemology of deliberation and dissent. Southern Journal of Philosophy, 44, 28-42.

‗t Hart, P. (1998). Preventing groupthink revisited: Evaluating and reforming groups in government. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 73, 306-326.

Tetlock, P. E., Peterson, R. S., McGuire, C., Chang, S., & Feld, P. (1992). Assessing political group dynamics: The test of the groupthink model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 403–425.

Turner, M. E., & Pratkanis, A. R. (1998a). A social identity maintenance model of groupthink. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 73, 210-235.

Turner, M. E., & Pratkanis, A. R. (1998b). Theoretical perspectives on groupthink: A twenty-fifth anniversary appraisal [Guest editors‘ introduction]. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 73, 103-104.

Turner, M. E., Pratkanis, A. R., Probasco, P., & Leve, C. (1992). Threat, cohesion, and group effectiveness: Testing a social indemnity maintenance perspective on groupthink. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 781–796.

Whyte, G. (1998). Recasting Janis‘s groupthink model: The key role of collective efficacy in decision fiascos. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 73, 185–209.



Yetiv, S. A. (2003). Groupthink and the gulf crisis. British Journal of Political Science, 33, 419-442.

Divine Empowerment of Leaders in Early Christianity

Tony Petrucci Temple University

The process of intertexture analysis is utilized to segment and interpret meanings and intentions based on Luke’s interpretation of Joel 2 as he authored Acts 2. This includes Luke’s development of the character Peter and his thoughts and intentions at the Pentecost. The concept of divine empowerment is brought to light. Topics such as law vs. spirit are explored, as well as the resurrection and other important moments in biblical history. Divine empowerment is analyzed to develop an understanding of empowerment in modern leadership theory. The focus, as guided through exegesis, is on empowerment, transformational leadership, organizational commitment, symbolism, and storytelling. These concepts were important in the connectivity of God’s message and divine empowerment, and in the beliefs and actions of followers. The concepts carry a similar purpose in the secular business world, relating instead to belief in the values, vision, and message and to creating action toward established goals in a manner that fosters ownership on behalf of the followers.

Certain individuals in the Bible were blessed with divine empowerment. The exploration of the book of Acts is analyzed with a thorough exegesis process; a relationship between Joel 2 and Acts 2 is established in that Luke draws upon and alters aspects of Joel 2 to develop Acts 2 in proper context to the times and based on God’s will through divine empowerment. Important and controversial topics such as the resurrection, the law, and the spirit are explored from different perspectives. Divine empowerment is then analyzed in relation to modern leadership theory to include empowerment, transformational leadership, organizational commitment, symbolism, and storytelling. The parallels and differences between the secular and Christian worlds are evaluated and discussed.

Intertexture Analysis

In exploration of divine empowerment, the intertextuality process was implemented to identify text from the metaphors, symbols, and interpretations of different texts that were utilized from a historical perspective to interpret the meaning of Acts 2 (Robbins, 1996). In this case, oral-scribal, cultural, and historical forms of intertextural analysis are utilized (Robbins, 1996). The initial analysis is conducted through intertexture of Joel 2

Divine Empowerment of Leaders in Early Christianity P a g e | 59


and Acts 2. As the author of Acts 2, Luke drew many influences from Joel 2 in the Old Testament. Certain components of Acts 2 were quoted or paraphrased from Joel 2.

As an example, there are differences between “then afterward” (Joel 2:28) and “in the last days it will be” (Acts 2:17). In Joel, the text seems to imply there is something more on Earth, whereas in Acts it seems to imply that the end of the world is near. In addition, there are other differences between Acts (2:17-2:21) and (Joel 2:28-2:32).

In comparing Acts 2:17 and Joel 2:28, there are differences in the situation as described by the historical text. “I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, and your young men shall see visions” (Joel 2:28). In Acts, a slightly different ordering of words is present: “That I pour out my spirit upon all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams” (Acts 2:17). It is evident that Luke is utilizing words from Joel 2 to present his view of the start of the end-times.

The Bible describes that God’s power will break down powerful current barriers: “Even on the male and female slaves, in those days, I will pour out my spirit” (Joel 2:29). Luke wrote about Peter when describing the Pentecost, noting when Peter asked people to declare their belief in Jesus and to ask for forgiveness of their sins as the end is approaching. “Even upon my slaves, both men and women, in those days I will pour out my spirit; and they shall prophesy” (Acts 2:18). In this case, the offering is for all who choose to believe and repent as delivered through Peter’s message, fueled by divine empowerment. The difference in context in the next verses is based on the laws of the Old Testament versus the promise of Jesus. “I will show portents in the heavens and on the earth, blood and fire and columns of smoke; the sun shall be turned to darkness, and the moon to blood, before the great and terrible day of the Lord comes” (Joel 2:30-32). In Joel 2, God may deliver good or bad based on the laws. This is different in Acts 2: “And I will show portents in the heaven above and signs of the earth below, blood, and fire and smoky mist. The sun shall be turned to darkness and the moon to blood, before the coming of the Lord’s great and glorious day” (Acts 2:19-20). In this case, the end is “great” for those who believe. The difference in historical perspective is shown again through divine intervention:

Then everyone who calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved; for in Mount Zion and in Jerusalem there shall be those that escape, as the Lord has said, and among the survivors shall be those that the Lord calls. (Joel 2:32)

The difference in Peter’s interpretation through Luke’s writing is again significant. “Then everyone who calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved” (Acts 2:21). Simply



put—in this case, if you believe you will live. What used to be reserved for prophets is now available for everyone.

In Joel this is not the end of the world, but it is a breaking of the barriers of status and the opening of God’s kingdom, whereas in Acts it is the end of the world but also the beginning of life. In Joel the text references the slaves, but in Acts it says “my slaves.” Additionally, the forces are very descriptive in Joel and Acts, showing God’s activity. In Acts the description is mellowed; instead of the columns of smoke in Joel, Luke mentions smoky mist. This signals a peaceful end or a new beginning. In Joel it is described as a great and terrible day, whereas in Acts it talks of a great and glorious day. In Joel it talks of the Lord saving but also choosing, but in Acts it states that all who choose will be saved.

In further comparing Acts 2:18 with Joel 2:29, yet another written text is referenced by Luke but again with a noticeable addition. Acts demonstrates ownership by saying “my” slaves. The word “prophesy” could mean declarations of what is to come. Yet the difference is one of ownership and hope in Acts versus in Joel. In 1 Corinthians 11:5, there is writing about the social norms—women were not allowed to pray without a veil, and the major differences between men and women are described according to God. But the rest of 1 Corinthians 11 goes on to discuss the fact that God is downplaying or refuting these customs at this point in history, and that everything comes from God. Portents means something glorious is about to happen. Similarly, this is illustrated in Acts 2 by the distance between heaven and earth.

In Joel 2:31-32, the word “Lord” means God; in Acts 2:20-21, Lord means Jesus. Acts 2:21 omits words from Joel 2:32. In Joel, God is choosing who will have eternal life as part of the Old Testament. In Acts, if one had declared belief in and love of Jesus Christ, he or she would receive life. It was not a matter of being chosen; it was a matter of making a choice.

Divine empowerment also took place with David, a person who abided by the Lord. David is described as being at God’s feet. Luke wrote that the Lord gave David strength in Acts 2:24-28. In the book of Psalms, Sheol and Pit are used to describe hell; verses 6:5, 38:9, 88:10-12 all reference hell. This theme is important as it drives significant thinking about the process of death.

Also, divine empowerment can create a feeling of courage. Later in Acts, Paul demonstrates his courage based on divine empowerment. “Paul, on this occasion as in subsequent settings, used the freedom to complete his divine commission by confronting persistent misunderstanding and embittered hostility with fearless proclamation” (Bechard, 2003, p. 250). This courage was fueled through divine empowerment.



In Luke’s writing in Acts, Peter offered insights into his view of the original meaning of Psalm 16:10. Psalm 16:10 is the basis for arguments by both Peter, in Acts 2:27, and Paul, in Acts 13:35, for the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Peter offers commentary that brings explanation for the use of intertexture analysis from the Old Testament (Trull, 2004).

Peter’s sermon contained elements intended to bring all parties together. He linked the divine empowerment of the disciples and praised the power of God for the learned languages and overcoming the untrue accusations of drunkenness early in the morning. Luke was able to relate these occurrences to the writings in Joel and the primary issues. In addition, Luke used the material in Joel to show the divine empowerment of Jesus the Lord, and calls for repentance (Trull, 2004).

Peter talks about death as a painful experience that God freed Jesus from through the resurrection. This was a direct action from God, which Peter emphasizes, after the planned death of Jesus as mentioned in Acts 2:23. The death and resurrection were all part of God’s plan in which he empowered many to act out the subsequent events as well as tell the stories of the events; despite the difficulty in the metaphor, the meaning of Acts 2:24 is clear (Trull, 2004). God raised Jesus from the dead. Death's power, seen in both the pain it brings and its firm grasp, was unable to hold Jesus. David, through divine empowerment, prophesied that Jesus could not remain among the dead. It was impossible for Jesus to remain dead because David had prophesied that the Messiah would rise from the dead (Trull). “This connection is seen in the use of the explanatory γαρ in verse 25. This conjunction indicates that the prophecy of David in Psalm 16:8-11 is the reason death could not hold Jesus” (Trull, p. 437). His body would not decay, and he would be freed.

Luke, through the character Peter, is trying to reinforce his statements factually. “Following Peter's quotation of Psalm 16:8-11 in Acts 2:25-28 he explained that David was speaking not of himself, but of the Messiah” (Wedderburn, 1994, p. 29-32). This detail was shown, in part, by Peter’s declarations. “Peter made five important declarations that demonstrate the messianic reference in the psalm” (Trull, 2004, p. 440). He spoke of David’s tomb as evidence that David was not speaking of his own resurrection. He reinforced David’s place as a prophet through divine intervention. David also had the Davidic Covenant, he had a vision about the coming of the Lord, and David spoke of the resurrection (Trull). “Though the Old Testament never specifically calls David a prophet, the descriptions of Saul's and David's anointings may simply be that David was given a prophetic ability” (Trull, p. 443). David’s divine empowerment is related to his foresight of the resurrection of Jesus, and his written thoughts in Psalm 16:8-11 offer sufficient evidence of this foresight (Trull). Jesus is differentiated from David in that his body was not only resurrected, but it was not left to decay, whereas David’s body did decay (Trull).



Peter also spoke, as recorded in Acts 1:15-22, about Judas and the betrayal. Concerned for the credibility of the ministry, there was a need for distance lest the divine empowerment of the disciples come into question. Psalm 16 has been interpreted in different ways as being connected to this issue:

Modern scholars have offered a variety of explanations for Peter's interpretation of Psalm 16. Where ancient writers interpreted the psalm through New Testament statements, modern scholars begin with the original context in the Book of Psalms and then consider the interpretive relationship between the original context and the New Testament usage. (Trull, 2004, p. 198)

These differences are an important component of the exegesis process. As mentioned previously, through the exegesis process analysis of Psalm 16, areas are questioned such as verse 9 where “in security” is replaced by “in hope,” and the concept of Sheol and everyone that died is going there compared to the concept that the believers would go straight to heaven (Trull, 2004).

This position seeks to trace the development of a Psalm's meaning through canonical stages. “The canonical approach raises these questions: Can resurrection be proven in the Old Testament context of Psalm 16? Could David have spoken of the Messiah originally?” (Trull, 2004, p. 205-206). One of the main concepts is whether Psalm 16 truly proves the resurrection.

In using typology, Psalm 16 is interpreted somewhat differently. “Jesus' resurrection made possible and actual the hope of communion with God after death. Peter could then apply the Psalm directly to Jesus because His resurrection revealed for the first time what believers could expect after death” (Trull, 2004, p. 207). This brought a different perspective. “There are some that argue that Luke himself did not wish to contrast the giving of the Law and the giving of the Spirit” (Wedderburn, 1994, p. 29). This was a difficult and controversial topic to address.

There is a gap in time that is important relative to Luke. “It is well known, too, that Luke's delay of the outpouring of the Spirit until 50 days after the resurrection contrasts with John 20:22, where Jesus breathes the Spirit upon his disciples on the day of his resurrection” (Pickett, 2005, p. 435). This contrast between the Law and the Spirit was a common and difficult one during this time, and still is today.

Galilee becomes important as it relates to Jesus. “Galilee is confirmed as the place where the risen Jesus will meet his followers to continue actualizing the kingdom of God” (Pickett, 2005, p. 435). This was clear in the Bible: “The numerous echoes and allusions to Scripture indicate that Mark's depiction of Jesus' ministry in Galilee must be understood in the light of Israel's history and hopes” (Pickettp. 437). This picture of the



resurrection continues to shape the hopes and thoughts of many during this time. “It is against this background of power/presence/Spirit in the Old Testament, and of Luke's great joy in the miraculous as a sure sign of the Gospel” (Dorman, 1985, p. 149). This message was filled with power and hope: “You shall receive power when the Holy Spirit comes upon you” (Dorman, p. 149). Through the message of God, the messengers touched with divine empowerment communicated in various ways.

Many were concerned or confused with Luke’s writings in certain ways. “As an example, Acts 9:15-16 is also better understood in the light of Luke’s literary and theological concerns than in terms of Paul’s life experience” (Hedrick, 1981, p. 420).

It is not accidental that the commissioning statement in Acts 9:15-16 differs markedly from the commissioning statements in the parallel accounts (Acts 22:14-15; 26:16-18). Of all three statements Acts 9:15-16 best captures the spirit and style of Luke's worldwide missionary theme for the book in Acts 1:8 (compare similar statements at 9:31; 13:46-47; 26:19-20). Acts 9:15-16 is the only commissioning statement that specifically mentions both Gentile and Jewish missions and the commission has a structure and style similar to Acts 1:8. (Hedrick, 1981, p. 420)

This intertexture enables a better understanding of Luke’s perspective.

Divine empowerment is an important concept. God is all knowing and his shared wisdom is empowerment. He speaks in a way that is understood by humans, and he takes action and creates symbols demonstrating that His love is everywhere (Dorman, 1985). “If it is the immediacy of God that is the distinctive factor in empowerment, then that perceived immediacy should contribute significantly to the spiritual growth and integration of one Christian in his or her talk with the Lord” (Dorman, p. 159). The immediacy in the presence of God has been discussed in a manner of charismatic renewal, which helps for inward exploration and leads to empowerment that may encourage expansion of the renewal (Dorman, 1985).

God calls us to action through empowerment. His message provides courage to take risks and make choices. The choices may be risky in the context of the earthly world and potential persecution and hardship, but there is zero risk in the context of the Spirit and eternal life (Propst, 1993). “As Karl Barth has reminded us, obedience to God is not theory or interpretation but action. Just as knowledge of God is not factual or philosophical but personal insight” (Propst, p. 237). The power is in the personal relationship with God.



Empowerment

Divine empowerment connects God’s grace, will, message, and purpose through messengers in different ways. Many of these ways have been observed and documented. Through this divine empowerment, believers are provided with guidance, support, and motivation. Non-believers are given a roadmap, evidence, and rationale for believing. This concept of divine empowerment mobilizes and motivates current followers and attempts to attract new followers in a relational and spiritual manner. When applying the concepts of divine empowerment and empowerment to the business world, there is a certain amount of overlap and connection and there are certain differences.

There are many leaders in the secular world who are Godly and whose faith grounds them in values, enabling them to be effective leaders. They are, in essence, divinely empowered, and they also empower their followers using secular methods. There are also leaders who may empower their team based on sound leadership principles, but may not draw their motivation or foundation from divine empowerment. The aim of this paper is to understand empowerment and the benefits relative to leadership. The understanding is taken from the study of divine empowerment, along with other relevant information from literature on empowerment.

There are different types of empowerment. A few examples are relationship empowerment, encouragement empowerment, and psychological empowerment. Relationship empowerment is the giving of power and control to employees in an organization through connecting and interacting with them, with the leader building capability in the follower and then giving them partial or full control (Yao & Cui, 2010). Encouragement empowerment is psychological in nature as it is based on the follower developing positive feelings of power and control through encouragement from the leader; psychological empowerment is different for different people in different situations (Yao & Cui). “Scholars have studied the attributive variables of psychological empowerment from different angles. From past relative empirical research, the factors influencing individual psychological empowerment include three aspects” (Yao & Cui, p. 22). The three factors include the individual, the work, and the team (Yao & Cui, 2010). These three factors provide the context for multifaceted interaction of these items.

Cakar and Erturk (2010) studied how innovative capability is developed based on culture and empowerment. As it relates to divine empowerment, this work on empowerment may have relevance. During the times of Acts 2 and Joel 2, there were different cultures involved. In this context, culture was based on country and religion. Certain people viewed the Old Testament or the law culturally in a certain manner. Others also included the New Testament in their perspective. People who received divine empowerment from the Lord also found themselves having to innovate relative to communication, symbolism, and influencing relative the message of God.



The same holds true today in that leaders must innovate and may choose empowerment as a method to help communicate, influence, and symbolize. Low power distance has been shown to lead to a higher rate of innovation, whereas high power distance tends to lead to lower levels of innovation and management practices that empower employees, such as communication, development, coaching, and giving employees decision making authority lead to innovation (Cakar & Erturk, 2010). “Empowerment is positively related to innovation capability” (Cakar & Erturk, p. 332). Innovation brings about change. “In addition, uncertainty avoidance is positively related to empowerment. Employees who perceive the uncertainty avoidance higher will report higher levels of empowerment” (Cakar & Erturk, 2010, p. 331). David and the disciples were given divine empowerment. They had access to direct information others did not have from God. They were given the authority to make decisions about how they presented certain information. Their innovative techniques in presentation and writing were designed to increase uncertainty avoidance, which then led to empowered followers.

Empowerment and Organizational Commitment

The primary goal of divine empowerment was similar to organizational commitment, only in a more meaningful, spiritual, deep, knowing, and never-ending way. God was using divine empowerment to create follower commitment of the human population or organization. There are many similarities between this concept and modern organizational commitment.

“Empowerment is the process which enables others to gain power, authority, and influence over others, institutions, or society” (Reza, Gholamreza, Hasan, & Nasrin, 2010, p. 65). The process of empowerment comes from relational and psychological foundations (Reza et al.). “The literature on empowerment from a relational perspective focuses on the dynamics of transferring power from the leader/manager to the subordinate/employee” (Reza et al., p. 66). The leader must make a decision to start this transfer. “The psychological perspective views empowerment as a subjective phenomenon. Empowerment in this view is a motivational construct where power and control are seen as motivational states internal to individuals” (Reza et al., p. 66). The importance of these to constructs is two-fold: it involves both transference and motivation. This means it is given and desired, which tends to build commitment.

“Organizational commitment refers to an employee’s attachment to an organization as a whole” (Reza et al., 2010, p. 71). Three types of organizational commitment are affective commitment, continuance commitment, and normative commitment. Affective commitment is based on an emotional attachment; continuance commitment is based on the cost of not continuing the relationship with the organization; and normative commitment is based on ethical principles (Reza et al.). Commitment to God can be based on all three types of commitments. In Reza et al.’s study, affective and normative



commitment had the strongest positive correlation with empowerment versus continuance commitment. Affective and normative commitment are more positive and based more on a rationale for wanting to have commitment, whereas continuance commitment is more focused on the cost of not doing something. Therefore, commitment was found to be stronger when empowered through positive motivation driven by relationships and ethics (Reza et al.).

Janssen’s (2004) study demonstrated that there could be moderating variables with the relationship between the independent variable of empowerment and the dependent variable of organizational commitment. In this specific study, conflict with superiors was the moderating variable; in this case, as conflict increased, employee commitment levels decreased (Janssen). As organizations empower their employees, it is important to understand other factors that may moderate or mediate the independent and dependent variables. This may be critical to the execution of empowerment and the desired resultant commitment levels.

Empowerment and Transformational Leadership

Transformational leadership has been linked to many positive organizational outcomes, including job satisfaction, perceived extra effort, and organizational citizenship. Psychological empowerment has been shown to enhance the positive effects of transformational leadership (Fuller, Morrison, Jones, Bridger, & Brown, 1999). “Psychological empowerment has been defined as the increased intrinsic task motivation manifested in cognitions that reflect an individual’s active orientation to his or her work role” (Spreitzer, 1995, p. 1443). This moderating effect can raise the levels of organizational outcomes.

There are several approaches to empowerment research. One is the leadership approach, wherein certain aspects of leadership drive empowering behaviors of followers. Transformational leadership specifically plays an important role relative to the empowerment construct, and components of transformational leadership such as intellectual stimulation, individualized consideration, and inspirational motivation all are related to psychological empowerment (Menon, 2001). These components stimulate creativity and build a sense of higher purpose for followers (Menon). This results in a more empowered professional.

Symbolic Leadership and Storytelling

Symbolism creates a visualization process where people make connections based on actions involving symbols. Symbols can be reconstructions, reinterpretations, or connections to a memory, object, or idea (Grunig, 1993). “Symbolic leaders enjoy a sense of agency that eludes most other employees in the typical organization” (Grunig, p.



103). The Aboriginals have demonstrated effective leadership through symbolism and empowerment in a spiritual manner.

“The Aboriginals view leadership as a spiritual endeavor that is holistic and egalitarian in nature. Aboriginal leaders use a more indirect style of communication that frequently invokes traditional imagery, story-telling and animal-based metaphors” (Julien, Wright, & Zinni, 2010, p. 114). They also practice connecting as a society, and the leaders find spiritual strength along with a value-based way to live and worship as they focus on sharing information and decision making, which in turn leads to empowerment—although it can lead to groupthink as well (Julien et al.).

Aboriginal leaders have long practiced the art of story-telling. Stories and symbols are an important part of connecting with followers (Julien et al., 2010). These leaders often even use animals in their stories as symbols. “The following is an example of a story: If you watch the buffalo, one will go over the cliff and they will all follow. Geese are different. Everyone takes a turn leading the formation” (Julien et al., p. 120). Symbolism and storytelling create a linkage to the true meaning in a manner that creates visualization.

Kouzes and Posner (2007) have referenced symbols in their writing to clarify and reinforce messages. One way they discuss this is through animating the vision where symbols are used to bring to life the aspirations of the leader in a manner that resonates with followers, strengthens their perception of the leader, and creates a connection to the vision in an aligned manner. Similarly, they use a concept called “imagine the possibilities,” where symbolism again is a vital part of helping followers to visualize important themes and messages (Kouzes & Posner).

Conclusion

Divine empowerment connected men such as David with God. Acts 2, authored by Luke, explains the concepts of the Spirit, eternal life, and the resurrection. Luke, through divine empowerment, utilized writings from Joel 2 as part of his writings and changed certain aspects of the text in order to capture the times and to properly reflect the will of God, the transition from the Law to the Holy Spirit, and the concept that to believe is to live. These controversial times were difficult, and divine empowerment prepared important leaders such as Luke and David. Just as empowerment today strengthens and prepares leaders to enable their followers to accomplish goals based on vision and values, these leaders often demonstrated individualized consideration and inspirational motivation as a part of their empowerment process. They used transformational leadership, organizational commitment, symbolic leadership, and storytelling to accomplish these objectives.



About the Author

Tony Petrucci is an assistant professor in the Department of Human Resources Management, Fox School of Business at Temple University.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Tony Petrucci, Fox School of Business, Alter Hall #343, 1801 Liacouras Walk, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19122. [Email: [email protected]].

References

Bechard, D. (2003). The disputed case against Paul: A redaction-critical analysis of Acts 21:27-22:29. Catholic Biblical Quarterly, 65(2), 232-250.

Cakar, N., & Erturk, A. (2010). Comparing innovation capability of small and medium-sized enterprises: Examining the effects of organizational culture and empowerment. Journal of Small Business Management, 48(3), 325-359.

Dorman, D. (1985). The purpose of empowerment in Christian life. Pnuema, 7(2), 147-165.

Fuller, B., Morrison, R., Jones, L., Bridger, D., & Brown, V. (1999). The effects of psychological empowerment on transformational leadership and job satisfaction. Journal of Social Psychology, 139(3), 389-391.

Grunig, L. (1993). Image and symbolic leadership: Using focus group research to bridge the gaps. Journal of Public Relations Research, 5(2), 95-126.

Hedrick, C. (1981). Paul’s conversion/call: A comparative analysis of the three reports in Acts. Journal of Biblical Literature, 100(3), 415-432.

Janssen, O. (2004). The barrier effect of conflict in the relationship between employee empowerment and organizational commitment. Work & Stress, 18(1), 56-65.

Julien, M., Wright, B., & Zinni, D. (2010). Stories from the circle: Leadership lessons learned from aboriginal leaders. Leadership Quarterly, 21(1), 114-126.

Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2007). The leadership challenge. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Menon, S. (2001). Employee empowerment: An integrative psychological approach. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 50(1), 153-181.

Pickett, R. (2005). Following Jesus in Galilee: Resurrection as empowerment in the Gospel of Mark. Currents in Theology and Mission, 32(6), 434-444.



Propst, R. (1993). Defusing the powers with Jesus as a model of empowerment: Treating the avoidant personality. Journal of Pastoral Care, 47(3), 230-238.

Reza, B., Gholamreza, J., Hasan, Z., & Nasrin, D. (2010). An examination of the relationship between empowerment and organizational commitment. International Journal of Human Sciences, 7(2), 63-79.

Robbins, V. (1996). The tapestry of early Christian discourse: Rhetoric, society, and ideology. New York: Routledge.

Spreitzer, G. (1995). Psychological empowerment at the workplace: Dimensions, measurement, and validation. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 1442-1465.

Trull, G. (2004). An exegesis of Psalm 16:10. Bibliotheca Sarca, 161, 304-321.

Trull, G. (2004). Peter’s interpretation of Psalm 16:8-11 in Acts 2:25-32. Bibliotheca Sarca, 161(644), 432-448.

Trull, G. (2004). View’s on Peter’s use of Psalm 16:8-11 in Acts 2:25-32. Bibliotheca Sarca, 161(642), 194-214.

Wedderburn, A. (1994). Tradition and redaction in Acts 2:1-13. Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 55, 27-54.

Yao, K., & Cui, X. (2010). Study on the moderating effect of the employee psychological empowerment on the enterprise employee turnover tendency: Taking small and middle enterprises in Jinan as the example. International Business Research, 3(3), 21-31.

Leader’s Authenticity Influence on Followers’ Organizational Commitment

Artem Kliuchnikov Regent University

This study researches the influence of authentic leadership on three types of organizational commitment—affective, continuance, and normative—and examines the extent to which trust mediated this relationship. The study uses quantitative methodology that incorporates cross-sectional survey research. Convenience sampling (N=66) is utilized in the study. The results are discussed in terms of correlative data analysis. Future direction for this research is discussed and limitations of this study are outlined.

Most of the management literature in the West is based on the American experience (Welsh, Luthans, & Sommer, 1993). Cross-cultural research that tests U.S. based theories in Ukrainian and Russian contexts may prove to be beneficial to Russian and Ukrainian managers, foreign owned Russian and Ukrainian subsidiaries, and other businesses. While employee attitudes are a significant area of research in the U.S., little research has been conducted in this area in post-Soviet countries (Buchko, Weinzimmer, & Sergeyev, 1998).

Soviet and post-Soviet leadership have been known for being controlling and stubborn (Buchko, Weinzimmer & Sergeyev, 1998), and a lack of integrity has been identified as a reason why post-Soviet managers fail (Longenecker, 2001). The following research proposal is focused on the relationship between authentic leadership and organizational commitment and suggests that changing leadership from hypocritical (lack of integrity) to authentic may contribute to development of organizational commitment. While testing the theoretical framework in the context of two Eastern European countries, Ukraine and Russia, this research is designed to provide a practical frame of reference for leadership in post-Soviet countries. As Ashman (2007) stated, organizational commitment is ―fundamental to the creation of an optimally functioning organization‖ (p. 6).

Authentic Leadership

Chester Barnard (1938) gave the very first reference to authenticity in management and organizational studies. At the time, he used the authentic capacity of a leader as the litmus test of executive quality. In recent years, there has been a renewed interest to this construct due to the major shift to positive psychology. After years of studying what is

Leader’s Authenticity Influence on Followers’ Organizational Commitment P a g e | 71

Emerging Leadership Journeys, Vol. 4 Iss. 1, 2011, pp. 70-90. © 2011 Regent University School of Global Leadership & Entrepreneurship ISSN 1930-806X | [email protected]

wrong with people and organizational behavior, according to Luthans (2002), the time has come for positive constructs. Thus, positive organizational behavior research became the catalyst for developing the construct of authentic leadership (Luthans & Avolio, 2009). Luthans and Avolio were the first to use and define authentic leadership. They used the term authentic to describe ―very basic, genuine elements of positive leadership development‖ (p. 303). A number of studies of this phenomenon have been conducted since then.

Authentic leadership is a root construct to any positive leadership (Avolio & Gardner, 2005). Avolio (2005) called authentic leadership ―the highest end of leadership‖ (p. 194). George (2003) described authentic leadership as ―being your own person‖ (p. 12). Authentic leadership theory takes much from Kernis’ (2003) study on authenticity, yet the literature review shows that there is no universally accepted definition of the authentic leadership (Shamir & Eilam, 2005; Turner & Mavin, 2007). The study by Walumbwa et al. (2008) provides an operational definition of authentic leadership:

A pattern of leader behavior that draws upon and promotes both positive psychological capacities and a positive ethical climate, to foster greater self-awareness, an internalized moral perspective, balanced processing of information, and relational transparency on the part of leaders working with followers, fostering positive self-development. (Walumbwa et al., p. 94)

One of the fundamental components of the authentic leadership construct is self-awareness. Researchers agree that self-awareness is the starting point of authentic leadership (Avolio & Gardner, 2005; Walumbwa et al., 2008; Avolio et al., 2004; Gardner et al., 2005). Self-awareness means that leaders know what is important to them (May et al., 2003). Whether it is values, identity, emotions, goals, or motives, the leaders need to be fully aware of them (Avolio & Gardner).

Sparrowe (2005) connected self-awareness with self-regulation, and makes it central to his definition of authentic leadership. A broader exploration of this construct shows that self-regulation helps leaders to assess discrepancies between their internalized standards and their praxis (Avolio & Gardner, 2005). The research indicates that self-regulation is a complex construct and it includes internalized regulation, balanced processing of information, relational transparency, and authentic behavior (Walumbwa et al., 2008; Gardner et al., 2005). Sparrowe stated that self-regulation helps to facilitate transparency and consistency in leadership, where behavior reflects inner standards of a leader. The process of self-regulation helps the leader to withstand the external pressure and influence (Gardner et al., 2009; Ilies, Morgeson & Nahrgang, 2005).

Avolio and Gardner (2005), Walumbwa et al. (2008), Avolio et al. (2004), and Eagly (2005) have all discussed relational authenticity or relational transparency, which reflects the fact that authentic leadership is opposite to impression management



(Avolio, 2005). While these two constructs are similar, Avolio and Gardner posit that relational transparency is more descriptive as it points to the transparent interaction between leaders and followers. Thus, relational authenticity or transparency is the construct that involves both leaders and followers as active agents of authentic relationships (Eagly; Avolio & Gardner).

There is some dispute over the unbiased processing construct that was initially suggested by Kernis (2003) and then implemented in the authentic leadership definition by Ilies et al. (2005). Unbiased processing implies that a leader is objective in assessing positive and negative self-aspects based on presented information (Goldman & Kernis, 2002). The foundational argument against unbiased processing comes from cognitive psychology research, which shows that humans are inherently flawed and cannot have unbiased opinions. Therefore, the unbiased processing construct has been replaced by balanced processing (Avolio & Gardner, 2005; Walumbwa et al., 2008). The change of the construct is significant. Instead of positing that authentic leaders are free from bias, balanced processing implies that authentic leaders are capable of considering multiple sides of the issue at hand and analyzing all relevant information before making a decision (Walumbwa et al., 2008; Avolio & Gardner, 2005; McKenna, Rooney, & Boal, 2009; Gardner et al., 2005; Gardner et al., 2009).

Are authentic leaders raised or born? Can just anyone be authentic? Conceptualization of authentic leadership shows that it is a multi-dimensional construct. It involves traits, behaviors, contexts, and attributions (Cooper, Scandura, & Schriesheim, 2005). Sparrowe (2005) posited that because authenticity is a developmental process, as a leader grows in self-awareness the leader actually grows to better understand his or her values. These values constitute a leader’s true self, and they are more static than dynamic.

Followers Trust in Their Leaders

Trust is a valuable contributor to different forms of exchange; it facilitates strong relationships between individuals and companies (Doney, Cannon, & Mullen, 1998). Norman (2006) stated that a trusting relationship between leaders and followers is one of the characteristics which differentiates mediocre organizations from the leading ones. Oxford English Dictionary defines trust as ―Confidence in or reliance on some quality or attribute of a person or thing, or the truth of a statement.‖ Schoorman, Mayer, and Davis (2007) defined trust as a ―willingness to be vulnerable to another party‖ (p. 347). Trust has been studied in different disciplines (organizational science, sociology, and psychology) and at different levels (individual, group, firm, and institutional) (Rousseau et al., 1998). Across all these disciplines, the definition of trust includes the willingness to be vulnerable (Rousseau et al.). On the other hand, other scholars define trust as willingness to rely on another, which is based on the characteristics of the other person (Doney, Cannon, & Mullen). Dietz and Hartog (2006) wrote about different



qualitative degrees of interpersonal trust: (1) calculus-based (suspicious, but benefits of trust outweigh the costs), (2) knowledge-based (positive confidence based on prior predictability), (3) relational-based (a stronger positive confidence based on shared affection), (4) identification-based (extremely positive confidence based on converged interests) (p. 563).

Organizational Commitment

While there are different definitions of organizational commitment in scholarly literature, these definitions share a common theme in that ―organizational commitment is recognized to be a bond of the individual to the organization‖ (Samad, 2005). It is more than passive presence in an organization. ―Committed employees feel the need to go beyond normal job requirements in order to make a significant personal contribution to the organization‖ (Perryer & Jordan, 2005, p. 382). Organizational commitment is multi-dimensional construct (Nwadei, 2003). Meyer and Allen (1991) conceptualized three components of organizational commitment: affective, continuance and normative commitment. Affective attachment refers to affective orientation to the group; it is the strength of individual identification with the group or organization, or as Ashman (2007) described, ―an emotional bond between individual and organization‖ (p. 6-7). Continuance commitment is connected with perceived costs of leaving organization. It speaks to the situation, when, for example, pension or position of seniority become contingent upon remaining with the organization. This is what Hrebiniak and Alutto called ―calculative involvement‖ (p. 560). Normative commitment speaks to the obligation that an employee feels toward his or her organization. Marsh and Mannari (1977) described it in following way: ―In this view, the worker considers it morally right to stay in the company, regardless of how much status enhancement or satisfaction the firm gives him over the years‖ (p. 59). The three constructs are components, rather than types of the organizational commitment (Meyer & Allen, 1991). In other words, they are not mutually exclusive, but are complementary and may be present to various degrees in the psychological state of employees.

Research Model and Hypotheses

Gardner et al. (2005) posited that authentic followership is an integral part of authentic leadership development. Shamir and Eilam (2005) stated that development of authentic leaders is beneficial because it affects followers in positive way. They defined authentic followers as people who (a) follow for authentic reasons, since they share leader’s values, beliefs and convictions; (b) do not have illusions or delusions about the leader; and (c) authenticate the leader (i.e., they judge the leader based on his convictions and beliefs and his consistency with them). Avolio et al. (2004) argued that authentic leaders, through their authentic behavior, motivate and transform their followers. As a result, followers become more authentic. Gardner et al. asserted that authentic leaders affect followers through positive modeling. This modeling includes high levels of self-



awareness, balanced processing, transparency, and authentic behavior. As a result, followers develop trust in their leader (Zhu, 2006; Avolio et al.; Turner & Mavin, 2007; Eagly, 2005). Thus, trustworthiness may be seen as an integral part of authentic leadership. Butler (1991) discussed ten conditions that lead to trust: availability, competence, consistency, fairness, integrity, loyalty, openness, overall trust, promise fulfillment, and receptivity. This resonates with characteristics of an authentic leader who is a trustworthy, reliable person with integrity. Based on qualitative measures of trust, components of authentic leadership, and current literature on authentic followership, it is possible to say that followers of authentic leaders may develop knowledge based trust, which is rooted in predictability. Once employees learn that what the leader says he or she does, followers can begin building knowledge based trust. This may later grow into identification based trust, wherein followers identify themselves with their leaders and the leaders’ values and goals.

Trust has been linked with lower turnover and organizational commitment (Watson & Papamarcos, 2002; Perryer & Jordan, 2005; Bernardi & Guptill, 2008). Perryer and Jordan (2005) stated that there has been limited research on the relationship between leadership style and employee commitment. The author has not found a study that is devoted to the way authentic leadership affects employees’ commitment to an organization. Based on the literature review, the author suggests the following model for research (figure 1):

Figure 1. Research model.

Due to the fact that authentic leadership develops followers who share leader’s values, beliefs, and convictions (Shamir & Eliam, 2005; Gardner et al., 2005), it is possible to suggest that authentic leadership will have the strongest correlation with affective commitment, which describes the strength of the employee’s identification with the organization (Meyer & Allen, 1991). As far as the other two kinds of organizational commitment, continuance commitment and normative commitment, it is difficult to hypothesize which of them will be stronger in suggested model. An employee may equally be committed to the organization because of perceived costs of leaving it (continuance commitment) and because of moral obligation that one might feel towards an organization (normative commitment). Authentic leadership may affect both kinds of commitment by its transparency and the moral stance of the authentic leader (Avolio & Gardner, 2005). Therefore, the research will seek to understand the correlation between authentic leadership and each kind of organizational commitment separately. The research tests the following hypotheses:

Authentic leadership

Trust Organizational commitment



H1: Authentic leadership has a positive correlation with affective commitment.

H2: Authentic leadership has a positive correlation with continuance commitment.

H3: Authentic leadership has a positive correlation with normative commitment.

H4: Authentic leadership’s correlation with affective commitment is higher than with continuance and normative commitment.

H5: Trust mediates the relationship between authentic leadership and affective organizational commitment.

H6: Trust mediates the relationship between authentic leadership and continuance organizational commitment.

H7: Trust mediates the relationship between authentic leadership and normative organizational commitment.

Control variables. The literature review shows that there are other predictors of organizational commitment, such as age, tenure, wages, and position in the organization (Meyer & Allen, 1991). Transactional leadership, as it focuses on exchange of rewards, also may affect organizational commitment. Aforementioned variables are control variables in this research model.

Research Method

In order to test the proposed hypotheses, a quantitative methodology that incorporates cross-sectional survey research was employed. Kerlinger and Lee (2000) stated that the best way to conduct survey research is through personal interviews, since mail questionnaires produce low returns and thus ―valid generalization cannot be made‖ (p. 603). Mail questionnaires need to be conducted in conjunction with other methods to verify the responses given. This research design implements web based questionnaires and personal interviews.

Sampling. Fowler (2002) posited that good sampling depends on sample frame and sample size. Sample frame is ―the set of people that has a chance to be selected, given the sampling approach that is chosen‖ (Fowler, p. 11). In the beginning stage of development of this research, a stratified random sampling (Kerlinger & Lee, 2000) was suggested to minimize the effect of control variables in this study. The sample frame would include people of the same age and similar tenure, wages, and positions in organizations. However, stratified random sampling is challenging in Eastern Europe, where people are reluctant to take surveys. Therefore, the sampling method was changed to convenience or accidental sampling (Kerlinger & Lee). This is the weakest, but also the most common form of sampling (Kerlinger & Lee). One of the criticisms of



this sampling method is that it is not representative of the population (Castillo, 2009). Girden (2001) suggested having 20 respondent samples per independent variable; sixty-six respondents participated in this research both from Kiev, Ukraine and Krasnoyarsk, Russia. The respondents represent employees in education, production, and service industries.

Instrumentation. Since understanding of a construct can be only as good as the instrument used to examine it (Dietz & Hartog, 2006), this study utilizes well-established instruments presented in peer reviewed journals.

To measure employees’ perception of their leaders’ authenticity (authentic leadership), the Authentic Leadership Questionnaire is employed (Appendix A). Its validity and theoretical and empirical basis have been extensively analyzed and confirmed (Avolio, 2007; Avolio & Gardner, 2005; Gardner et al., 2005; Avolio et al., 2004).

While the Organizational Commitment Questionnaire (OCQ) is the most used questionnaire in measuring the construct of organizational commitment (Ashman, 2007) and ―has been found to correlate strongly with leadership and mentoring variables‖ (Scandura & Williams, 2004, p. 457), OCQ measures only one dimension of organizational commitment – affective (Meyer & Allen, 1991; Nwadei, 2003). In order to rule out the influence of transactional rewards, Meyer and Allen’s instrument (1991) is used (Appendix C). This scale is based on the three dimensions of organizational commitment: affective, continuance, and normative.

Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) is used to measure and account for transactional leadership’s effect on organizational commitment (Appendix B). Antonakis et al. (2003) stated that construct validity of MLQ was established by Bass and Avolio (1997) with a large sample of pooled data (N=1490).

Clark and Payne’s (1997) instrument is used for measuring trust (Appendix D). It consists of 26 pairs of items: the first item in each pair focuses on what a person believes about his or her leadership, and the second focuses on intention to act based on this belief. This instrument also focuses on integrity (34 percent of trust related items) and benevolence (28 percent of items) (Dietz & Hartog, 2006).

Backtranslation. The instruments used in this study have been developed in North America and have been put together in English language. Therefore, they reflect the realities of the culture of origin for each instrument. Instruments developed in one country may lack validity in another (Gardberg, 2006). It is the researcher’s task to make sure that their instruments have conceptual and functional equivalence in the culture where research is conducted (Gardberg). Conceptual equivalence has to do with similarity of attitudes or behaviors associated with a given construct across cultures. Functional equivalence has to do with relationships of the construct under scrutiny, its



antecedents, or consequences in a given culture (Gardberg). One of the steps in reaching conceptual and functional equivalence is backtranslation. This is the process when two bilinguals work on translation, one of them translating from the source to the target language and the second blindly translating translated copy back into the original language (Brislin, 1970). Then the researcher has two copies in original language, which helps him see the differences in perception of the instrument in another language. Necessary corrections are made to the instrument in the target language to reflect the concepts pertaining to the research.

Out of the four instruments employed in this research, only three required translation and backtranslation. ALQ has been previously translated and tested in Russian language. The other three instruments underwent the translation/backtranslation process. Then, the two copies in their original language were reviewed by two native English-speaking investigators, and necessary suggestions were made to improve on the quality of the translation. The backtranslations are provided together with the original copies of the instruments in Appendices.

Another step of testing the translation is conducting a pretest. Two pretests were conducted with native speakers, where ―each subject completes the questionnaire, and is interviewed to probe about what he or she thought was meant by each questionnaire item and the chosen response‖ (Beaton et al., 2000, p. 3189). This helped to establish the semantic and idiomatic equivalence (Beaton et al.) as well as to establish conceptual equivalence. The researcher asked each question of the surveys and recorded the interviewees’ answers. Along with this, the researcher asked for the interviewees’ understanding of each of the questions and their response.

After analysis of the pretest and the final adaptation of the translated instruments, the questionnaires were distributed, with a cover letter and request to ask other people in their respective organizations to fill out the survey, among subjects in Ukraine and Russia via the Create Survey web application.

Instrumentation reliability. Prior to conducting the data analysis, all measures used in this study were tested on reliability. The reliability of the measures in this study is reported in Table 1.

Table 1: Chronbach’s alpha for instruments used in the research

Instrument Chronbach’s alpha Number of items in the scale

Authentic leadership 0.91 16

Transactional leadership 0.66 6

Trust 0.90 42

Organizational affective commitment 0.87 8



Organizational continuance commitment 0.80 8

Organizational normative commitment 0.66 8

Results

Responses from the surveys were entered into SPSS (version 17.0.2). Table 2 contains descriptive statistics; the mean and standard deviation are shown for control and for the independent and dependent variables in the study.

Table 2: Descriptive statistics (N=66).

Variable Mean Standard deviation

Authentic Leadership 3.45 0.74

Transactional leadership 2.94 0.75

Trust 3.29 0.44

Affective commitment 3.26 0.98

Continuance commitment 2.82 0.84

Normative commitment 2.68 0.63

Agea 2.38 0.76

Average wagesb 2.59 1.60

Tenurec 2.44 1.05

Positiond 3.21 1.05

a Age was coded 1 – younger than 20; 2 – 20 to 29; 3 – 30 to 39; 4 – 40 to 49; 5 – older than 50. b Average wages (per month) were coded 1 – less than $400; 2 – $400 to $599; 3 – $600 to $799; 4 – $800 to $999; 5 – more than

$1000 c Tenure was coded: 1 – less than one year; 2 – from 1 to 3 years; 3 – 4 to 5 years; 4 – 5 to 10 years; 5 – over 10 years. d Position was coded: 1 – entry level employee; 2 – entry level management; 3 – middle level management; 4 – upper level

management; 5 – senior management

Correlations. Correlation analysis was performed to assess the degree of relationships between independent, control and dependent variables. The results of Pearson r correlation are shown in Table 3.

Table 3: Correlations between variables

Variable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1. Age --

2. Average wages

-.05 --



3. Tenure .46** .09 --

4. Position .01 .33** 0 --

5. Authentic leadership

-.01 .30* 0 .27* --

6. Transactional leadership

-.15 -.04 -.28* .09 .48** --

7. Trust -.26* .19 -.06 .10 .55** .27* --

8. Affective commitment

.02 .20 .24* .22 .51** .10 .52** --

9. Continuance commitment

.03 .14 .16 .21 .14 .09 .15 .40** --

10. Normative commitment

.15 .01 .21 .02 .40** .21 .31* .52** .45** --

**. p < 0.01 *. p <0.05

This table shows the strongest positive correlation between authentic leadership and trust (r= 0.55), affective commitment and trust (r=0.52), affective commitment and authentic leadership (r=0.51). Control variables (age, average wages, tenure, position, and transactional leadership) do not have strong correlations with any of the three kinds of commitment. SPSS flagged only the correlation between tenure and affective commitment as significant (r=0.24)

Linear regression analysis. In order to establish the mediating effect of the trust variable, first the relationship between authentic leadership and trust was established using linear regression analysis. Table 4 shows the analysis of the relationship between authentic leadership and trust. It shows that authentic leadership had a significant influence on trust (standardized coefficient beta is .55).

Table 4: Coefficients for authentic leadership as IV and trust as DV.

Model

Unstandardized Coefficients

Standardized Coefficients

t Sig. B Std. Error Beta

1 (Constant) 2.17 .22 9.92 .000


.32 .06 .55 5.20 .000



Table 5 displays authentic leadership’s influence on affective organizational commitment and the mediating effect of trust. Authentic leadership had the highest effect on affective commitment, and the influence of control variables was insignificant (with the exception of tenure) before authentic leadership was introduced. Authentic leadership significantly reduced the influence of control variables; p < 0.01 for authentic leadership; therefore, H1 is supported. Before trust was introduced, authentic leadership had a standard coefficient beta of .54. After trust was introduced, authentic leadership had a standard coefficient beta of .33, and trust was .37. Therefore, trust had a partial mediation effect on the relationship between authentic leadership and affective commitment as it only partially reduced the influence of authentic leadership on affective commitment. As a result, H5 is partially supported.

Table 5: Authentic leadership’s influence on affective organizational commitment and the mediating effect of trust.

Model




1 (Constant) .67 .70 .95 .35

Transactional leadership

-.13 .17 -.10 -.79 .44

Age -.15 .16 -.12 -.96 .34

Average wages -.02 .07 -.03 -.25 .80

Tenure .26 .12 .27 2.21 .03

Position .09 .11 .10 .87 .39


.71 .18 .54 4.07 .00

2 (Constant) -1.46 .97 -1.51 .14


-.13 .16 -.10 -.80 .43

Age -.01 .15 -.01 -.07 .95

Average wages -.02 .07 -.04 -.32 .75

Tenure .23 .11 .25 2.12 .04

Position .11 .10 .12 1.08 .28




.44 .19 .33 2.33 .02

Trust .84 .28 .37 3.00 .00

a. Dependent Variable: Affective commitment

Table 6 reports on authentic leadership’s influence on continuance organizational commitment and the mediating effect of trust. It is evident that authentic leadership had no effect on continuance commitment; and p > .05, there is no statistical significance in the relationship between authentic leadership and continuance commitment. Therefore, H2 and H6 are not supported.

Table 6: Authentic leadership’s influence on continuance organizational commitment and mediating effect of trust.

Model




1 (Constant) 1.56 .71 2.19 .03


.14 .17 .12 .80 .43

Age -.06 .16 -.06 -.41 .68

Average wages .03 .07 .06 .46 .65

Tenure .18 .12 .22 1.51 .14

Position .14 .11 .18 1.33 .19


.01 .18 .01 .06 .95

2 (Constant) .93 1.04 .89 .38


.14 .17 .12 .81 .42

Age -.02 .16 -.02 -.14 .89

Average wages .03 .07 .06 .44 .66

Tenure .17 .12 .21 1.44 .16

Position .15 .11 .18 1.37 .18




-.07 .20 -.06 -.35 .73

Trust .25 .30 .13 .82 .42

a. Dependent Variable: Continuance commitment

Table 7 shows a significant influence of authentic leadership on normative commitment with standardized coefficient beta .41 and p = .01. This supports H3. Trust had a minor mediating effect on the relationship between authentic leadership and normative commitment, as seen in that when introduced to the analysis, it slightly reduced the standardized coefficient beta for authentic leadership to .3. However, trust did not have statistical significance with p>0.05. Therefore, H7 is not supported.

Table 7: Authentic leadership’s influence on normative organizational commitment and mediating effect of trust.

Model




1 (Constant) 1.09 .49 2.24 .03


.07 .12 .08 .58 .56

Age .05 .11 .07 .50 .62

Average wages -.04 .05 -.11 -.85 .40

Tenure .13 .08 .21 1.58 .12

Position -.04 .07 -.06 -.50 .62


.35 .12 .41 2.84 .01

2 (Constant) .40 .71 .56 .58


.07 .12 .08 .60 .55

Age .10 .11 .12 .89 .38

Average wages -.04 .05 -.11 -.88 .39

Tenure .12 .08 .20 1.48 .14

Position -.03 .07 -.05 -.43 .67




.26 .14 .30 1.85 .07

Trust .27 .20 .19 1.33 .19

a. Dependent Variable: Normative commitment

Analysis shows that authentic leadership had the highest influence on affective organizational commitment (.54); therefore, H4 is supported.

Discussion and Future Research

The present study is a preliminary step in understanding the influence of authentic leadership on organizational commitment in Eastern Europe. Findings of this study indicate that a positive and significant relationship exists between authentic leadership and affective organizational commitment. This proves the theoretical assumption that an authentic leader’s moral stance and the development of authentic followers who share the leader’s values and beliefs have a positive correlation with affective organizational commitment when followers identify themselves with the organization (Shamir & Eliam, 2005; Gardner et al., 2005; Meyer & Allen, 1991). Authentic leadership was expected to have positive correlation with continuance commitment, although not as strong as with affective commitment. This expectation was based on the transparency and truthfulness of authentic leaders, which allows employees to plan for their future growth and helps them clearly understand the organization’s future. However, the data analysis showed no significant correlation between authentic leadership and continuance organizational commitment. The third kind of organizational commitment, normative, was found to have positive correlation with authentic leadership. These findings point to the fact that authentic leadership contributes to moral- and value-based organizational commitment as both affective and normative types of commitment rooted in values and morality. Continuance commitment does not have significant correlation with authentic leadership due to the fact that it is based on transactional, calculative involvement. These findings point to the contribution authentic leadership makes into building strong organizations with committed employees who share the vision and goals of an organization and thus achieve more than they would in their own self-interest (Northouse, 2007).

This research established partial mediation of trust in the correlation between authentic leadership and affective organizational commitment. However, trust does not mediate the relationship between authentic leadership and normative commitment.

Future research may focus on moderating effects of cultural values, as both authentic leadership and affective/normative commitment are based on values (Shamir & Eliam, 2005; Gardner et al., 2005; Meyer & Allen, 1991). As authentic leadership is based upon



dynamic ethics (Henderson, 1982; May et al., 2003), it implies that every authentic leader bases his or her own ethics and values on self-awareness (May et al.). However, different cultures represent different values (Hofstede, 2001), and as this study researched the correlation between authentic leadership and organizational commitment, it had homogeneous cultural representation among leaders and followers in each organization. It is also noteworthy that trust is culturally embedded (Elahee, Kirby, & Nasif, 2002). Therefore, culture may moderate the relationship between authentic leadership and affective/normative types of organizational commitment.

Limitations

The first limitation of this research is convenience sampling. This is the weakest form of sampling. Kerlinger and Lee (2000) suggested avoiding it or using it with extreme circumspection only if there is no other way of getting a sample. One of the dangers of this kind of sampling is the non-response bias. The non-response bias has to do with a theory that those who respond to surveys answer questions differently than those who do not respond to surveys (―Nonresponse bias,‖ 2009). Also, there were two occasions when the employees were not allowed to fill out the surveys for this study by their leadership. Therefore, this study can be improved by employing random sampling procedures.

Translation of the instruments also may have contributed to misguided answers to survey questions. While necessary steps of translation, backtranslation, pretest, and final tweaking of the instruments were conducted, further steps such as panel of professionals and experts in the respective fields, who would evaluate each of the translated instruments, could improve the validity of the instruments. Additionally, although all the instruments were translated into Russian, in Ukraine many people speak Ukrainian as their native language. This may have caused some misunderstandings of survey questions among Ukrainian respondents. To improve this study, the instruments should go through the rigorous process of translation – backtranslation – pretest and tweaking in the Ukrainian language as well for the Ukrainian sample.

Common method variance (CMV) may be another limitation of this study as the data on independent, dependent, and mediating variables was collected from the same source. Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee, and Podsakoff (2003) gave the following reasons for CMV: ―common rater, a common measurement context, a common item context, or from the characteristics of the items themselves‖ (p. 885). This study could be improved by collecting data on predictors and criterion from different sources: leaders could evaluate employees’ commitment, while employees could evaluate characteristics of authentic leadership in their leaders. The advantage of this procedure design is that it makes it impossible for the rater ―to bias the observed relationship between the predictor and criterion variable, thus eliminating the effects of consistency motifs, implicit theories,



social desirability tendencies, dispositional and transient mood states, and any tendencies on the part of the rater to acquiesce or respond in a lenient manner‖ (Podsakoff et al., p. 887).

Conclusion

This research shows the correlation between authentic leadership and two types of organizational commitments, affective and normative, in an Eastern European context. The initial premise for this research was that post-Soviet leadership has been known for being controlling (Buchko, Weinzimmer, & Sergeyev, 1998) and has exhibited a lack of integrity (Longenecker, 2001). Authentic leadership was considered one of the ways to improve the situation in failing Ukrainian and Russian businesses by fostering committed employees in the organizations. The research has shown that authentic leadership contributes to development of organizational commitment based on values and ethics. The author hopes that this will be the first of many further steps which will test positive leadership theories in Eastern European context and help bring sound leadership practice into businesses of post-Soviet countries.

About the Author

Artem Kliuchnikov is a second-year Ph.D. student at Regent University, where he is studying organizational leadership. For the last 15 years, he has been involved in a ministry organization comprised of people from Canada, the U. S., Ukraine, and Russia, and he has organized different ministry projects across Russia and Ukraine. His interests include cross-cultural leadership research.

References

Antonakis, J., Avolio, B. J., & Sivasubramaniam, N. (2003). Context and leadership: An examination of the nine-factor full-range leadership theory using the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire. The Leadership Quarterly, 14(2), 261-295.

Ashman, I. (2007). An investigation of the British organizational commitment scale: A qualitative approach to evaluating construct validity. Management Research News, 30(1), 5-24.

Avolio, B. J. (2005). Leadership development in balance: Made/born. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Avolio, B. J. (2007). Promoting more integrative strategies for leadership theory building. American Psychologist, 62, 25-33.



Avolio, B. J., & Gardner, W. L. (2005). Authentic leadership development: Getting to the root of positive forms of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 16, 315-338.

Avolio, B. J., Gardner, W. L., Walumbwa, F. O., Luthans, F., & May, D. R. (2004). Unlocking the mask: A look at the process by which authentic leaders impact follower attitudes and behaviors. The Leadership Quarterly, 15, 801-823.

Barnard, C. (1938). The functions of the executive. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Beaton, D. E., Bombardier, C., Guillemin, F., & Ferraz, M. B. (2000). Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine, 25(24), 3186-3191.

Bernardi, R. A., & Guptill, S. T. (2008). Social desirability response bias, gender, and factors influencing organizational commitment: An international study. Journal of Business Ethics, 81, 797-809.

Brislin, R. W. (1970). Back-translation for cross-cultural research. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 1(3), 185-216.

Buchko, A. A., Weinzimmer, L. G., & Sergeyev, A. V. (1998). Effects of cultural context on the antecedents, correlates, and consequences of organizational commitment: A study of Russian workers. Journal of Business Research, 43, 109-116.

Butler, J. K. (1991). Toward understanding and measuring conditions of trust: Evolution of a conditions trust inventory. Journal of Management, 17(3), 643-663.

Castillo, J. J. (2009). Convenience sampling. Retrieved June 27, 2010 from Experiment Resources: http://www.experiment-resources.com/convenience-sampling.html

Clark, M. C., & Payne, R. L. (1997). The nature and structure of workers’ trust in management. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18, 205-224.

Cooper, C. D., Scandura, T. A., & Schriesheim, C. A. (2005). Looking forward but learning from our past: Potential challenges to developing authentic leadership theory and authentic leaders. The Leadership Quarterly, 16, 475-493.

Dietz, G., & Hartog, D. N. (2006). Measuring trust inside organizations. Personnel Review, 35(5), 557-588.

Doney, P. M., Cannon, J. P., & Mullen, M. R. (1998). Understanding the influence of national culture on the development of trust. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 601-620.



Eagly, A. H. (2005). Achieving relational authenticity in leadership: Does gender matter? The Leadership Quarterly, 16, 459-474.

Elahee, M. N., Kirby, S. L., & Nasif, E. (2002). National culture, trust, and perceptions about ethical behavior in intra- and cross-cultural negotiations: An analysis of NAFTA countries. Thunderbird International Business Review, 44(6), 799-818.

Fowler, F. J. (2002). Survey research methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Gardberg, N. A. (2006). Reputatie, reputation, réputation, reputazione, ruf: A cross-cultural qualitative analysis of construct and instrument equivalence. Corporate Reputation Review, 9(1), 39-61.

Gardner, W. L., Avolio, B. J., Luthans, F., May, D. R., & Walumbwa, F. O. (2005). Can you see the real me? A self-based model of authentic leader and follower development. Leadership Quarterly, 16, 434-372.

Gardner, W. L., Fischer, D., & Hunt, J. G. (2009). Emotional labor and leadership: A threat to authenticity? The Leadership Quarterly, 20, 466-482.

George, B. (2003). Authentic leadership: Rediscovering the secrets to creating lasting value. (1st ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Girden, E. R. (2001). Evaluating research articles from start to finish (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Goldman, B. M., & Kernis, M. (2002). The role of authenticity in healthy psychological functioning and subjective well-being. Annals of the American Psychotherapy Association, 5, 18–20.

Henderson, V. E. (1982). The ethical side of enterprise. Sloan Management Review, 23(3), 37-47.

Hofstede, G. H. (2001). Culture's consequences: comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications.

Hrebiniak, L. G., & Alutto, J. A. (1972). Personal and role-related factors in the development of organizational commitment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17(4), 555-573.

Ilies, R., Morgeson, F. P., & Nahrgang, J. D. (2005). Authentic leadership and eudaemonic well-being: Understanding leader-follower outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly, 16, 373-394.



Kerlinger, F. N., & Lee, H. B. (2000). Foundations of behavioral research (4 ed.). Orlando, FL: Harcourt College Publishers.

Kernis, M. H. (2003). Toward a conceptualization of optimal self-esteem. Psychological Inquiry, 14, 1-26.

Longenecker, C. O. (2001). Why managers fail in post-Soviet Russia: Causes and lessons. European Business Review, 13(2), 101.

Luthans, F. (2002). The need for and meaning of positive organizational behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(6).

Luthans, F., & Avolio, B. J. (2009). The ―point‖ of positive organizational behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30, 291-307.

Marsh, R. M., & Mannari, H. (1977). Organizational commitment and turnover: A predictive study. Administrative Science Quarterly, 22, 57-75.

May, D. R., Hodges, T. D., Chan, A. Y. L., & Avolio, B. J. (2003). Developing the moral component of authentic leadership. Organizational Dynamics, 32(3), 247-260.

McKenna, B., Rooney, D., & Boal, K. B. (2009). Wisdom principles as a meta-theoretical basis for evaluating leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 20, 177-190.

Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 1(1), 61-89.

Nonresponse bias (2009). Retrieved August 14, 2010 from http://www.statpac.com/surveys/nonresponse-bias.htm

Norman, S. M. (2006). The role of trust: Implications for psychological capital and authentic leadership. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE.

Northouse, P. G. (2007). Leadership: Theory and practice. (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.

Nwadei, A. C. (2003). The relationship between perceived values congruence and organizational commitment in a multinational organization. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertation and Thesis database. (UMI No. 3082008).

Perryer, C., & Jordan, C. (2005). The influence of leader behaviors on organizational commitment: A study in the Australian public sector. International Journal of Public Administration, 28, 379-396.



Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879-903.

Rousseau, D. M., Sitkin, S. B., Burt, R. S., & Camerer, C. (1998). Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 393-404.

Samad, S. (2005). Unraveling organizational commitment and job performance relationship: Exploring the moderating effect of job satisfaction. The Business Review, 4(2), 79-84.

Scandura, T. A., & Williams, E. A. (2004). Mentoring and transformational leadership: The role of supervisory career mentoring. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 65, 448-468.

Shamir, B., & Eilam, G. (2005). ―What’s your story?‖ A life-stories approach to authentic leadership development. The Leadership Quarterly, 16, 395-417.

Shoorman, F. D., Mayer, R. C., & Davis, J. H. (2007). An integrative model of organizational trust: Past, present, and future. Academy of Management Review, 32(2), 344-354.

Sparrowe, R. T. (2005). Authentic leadership and narrative self. The Leadership Quarterly, 16, 419-439.

Trust (n.d.) In Oxford English Dictionary. Retrieved April 2, 2010 from http://0-dictionary.oed.com.library.regent.edu/cgi/entry/50259124?query_type=word&queryword=trust&first=1&max_to_show=10&sort_type=alpha&result_place=2&search_id=ouK1-Jf6DI2-1339&hilite=50259124

Turner, J., & Mavin, S. (2007). What can we learn from senior leader narratives? The strutting and fretting of becoming a leader. Leadership & Organizational Development Journal, 29(4), 367-391.

Walumbwa, F. O., Avolio, B. J., Gardner, W. L., Wernsing, T. S., & Peterson, S. J. (2008). Authentic leadership: Development and validation of a theory-based measure. Journal of Management, 34(1), 89-126.

Watson, G. W., & Papamarcos, S. D. (2002). Social capital and organizational commitment. Journal of Business and Psychology, 16(4), 537-552.

Welsh, D. H. B., Luthans, F., & Sommer, S. M. (1993). Managing Russian factory workers: Rhe impact of U.S.-based behavioral and participative techniques. Academy of Management Journal, 36(1), 58-79.



Zhu, W. (2006). Authentic leadership and follower moral decision intention: Role of follower moral identity. (Doctoral dissertation). (UMI No. 3216345).

Instructor Transformational Leadership and Student Outcomes

Janelle L. Harrison Regent University

This study addresses the research question of how instructor transformational leadership behaviors and transactional leadership behaviors affect student outcomes of cognitive learning, affective learning, student perceptions of instructor credibility, and communication satisfaction in distance education. An overview of the theoretical underpinnings of the study is provided, as well as the tested hypotheses. A summary of the methodology, including sampling procedures, instrumentation, and data collection processes is presented, along with the procedures used for data analysis. Multiple linear regression was used to examine the relationships among the specified variables. Results support all four hypotheses, indicating that instructor transformational leadership behaviors are a more significant predictor of cognitive learning, affective learning, perceptions of instructor credibility, and communication satisfaction than instructor transactional leadership behaviors. The implications of the findings as well as the limitations of this research and suggestions for future research are discussed.

The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between student perceptions of instructor transformational and transactional leadership behaviors and student outcomes of cognitive learning, affective learning, perceptions of instructor credibility, and communication satisfaction. This research stems from a lack of literature pertaining to the relationship between the specified variables in online courses. Independent variables are identified as transformational leadership behaviors and transactional leadership behaviors. Dependent variables are student cognitive learning, affective learning, perceptions of instructor credibility, and communication satisfaction.

This study is based on transformational leadership theory, transactional leadership theory, and social learning theory to understand how instructor leadership behaviors affect student cognitive learning, affective learning, perceptions of instructor credibility, and communication satisfaction. This research effort suggests that the concepts of transformational and transactional leadership, drawn from leadership research, can help fill the research gap and strengthen understanding of instructor leadership and student outcomes in online courses.

Instructor Transformational Leadership and Student Outcomes P a g e | 92


Review of Relevant Literature

Since Burns first introduced the concept of transformational leadership in 1978, a great deal of research has been devoted to exploring the behaviors of leadership styles (Avolio, Bass, & Jung, 1999; Bass & Avolio, 1994; Bass, 1985). Current studies typically examine the effects of transformational leadership on outcome variables in an organizational setting (Bolkan & Goodboy, 2009). Literature examining the phenomenon of instructor transformational leadership and student outcomes, specifically in online courses is limited; however, studies contributing to the development of the hypotheses for this study are examined with respect to an overview of transformational and transactional leadership, and of transformational leadership in education.

An Overview of Transformational Leadership

Originally developed by Burns (1978), transformational leadership occurs when one or more persons engage with others in such a way that leaders and followers raise one another to a higher level of motivation, performance, and morality (p. 20). Transformational leaders have been described in prior literature as highly interactive, passionate, empowering, visionary, and creative (Hackman & Johnson, 2004). Bass (1985) further expanded Burn’s theory by conceptualizing transformational leadership behaviors into four categories: idealized influence, intellectual stimulation, individualized consideration, and inspirational motivation.

Idealized influence. Bass (1999) described idealized influence as the transformational leader’s ability to clearly articulate a vision to followers and the ability to motivate followers to join the vision (p. 19). As a result, followers place a high degree of trust in the leader (Bass, 1985). Yukl (2006) stated that idealized influence behaviors arouse strong follower emotions and identification with the leader. Banjeri and Krishnan (2000) found that followers usually describe this aspect of transformational leadership in terms of charisma. Banjeri and Krishnan went on to note that followers describe their charismatic leaders as making followers enthusiastic about tasks, commanding respect, and having a sense of mission that they transmit to followers (p. 407).

Intellectual stimulation. Avolio et al. (1999) described intellectual stimulation as getting followers to question the tried and true methods of solving problems by encouraging them to improve upon those methods (p. 444). Intellectual stimulation encourages followers to challenge leader decisions and group processes, thus encouraging innovative thinking (Bass & Steidlmeier, 1999). Brown and Posner (2001) advocate intellectual stimulation as a component of organizational learning and change by appealing to follower needs for achievement and growth in ways that the follower finds attractive. Brown and Posner (2001) found that the intellectual stimulation



component of transformational leadership plays a healthy and beneficial role in organizational learning because leaders place value in learning for both themselves and their followers.

Individualized consideration. Avolio et al. (1999) found that through the process of transformational leadership, the leader takes on the role of mentor by assigning responsibilities to followers as opportunities for growth and development through a process of self-actualization. Corrigan and Garman (1999) found that individualized consideration positively affects and facilitates team-building efforts. Yukl (2006) described individualized consideration behaviors as support, encouragement, and coaching to followers. The relationship used for mentoring and coaching is based on followers’ individual development needs with the outcome being the evolvement of followers into leaders (Bass & Steidlmeir, 1999; Bass, 2000). Barnett, McCormick, and Conners (2001) described individualized consideration as occurring when leaders develop interpersonal relationships with followers. It is these interactions that allow the leader to personalize leadership and establish goals for each individual follower (Barnett et al.).

Inspirational motivation. Bass (1999) described inspirational motivation as providing followers with challenges and meaning for engaging in shared goals. Bass and Steidlmeier (1999) took it further by identifying inspirational motivation as the leader’s ability to communicate his or her vision in a way that inspires followers to take action in an effort to fulfill the vision. Inspirational motivation enables leaders to remain focused on the vision of the group despite any obstacles that may arise (Kent, Crotts, & Azziz, 2001). Yukl (2006) described inspirational motivation behaviors as communicating an appealing vision, using symbols to focus subordinate effort, and modeling appropriate behaviors. Some researchers have related inspirational motivation to concepts of ethics, claiming that when leaders show concern for organizational vision and follower motivation, they are more inclined to make ethical decisions (Banjeri & Krishnan, 2000; Kent et al.).

An Overview of Transactional Leadership

The other conceptualization of leadership often cited in management literature is transactional leadership (Bolkan & Goodboy, 2009). Transactional leadership is traditionally described as an instrumental approach to organizational leadership that is associated with task orientation (Conger, 1999). Jung and Avolio (2000) described transactional leadership as occurring when the leader and his or her followers agree on what the followers need to do to get rewards, with little effort to change follower personal values or to develop a sense of follower trust and commitment to the leader (p. 951). According to Hackman and Johnson (2004), transactional leaders rely heavily on rewards to motivate followers and prevent poor performance using negative feedback



and criticism. Managers may even attempt to motivate subordinates by withholding extrinsic rewards (Conger).

Barbuto (2005) described three behaviors that make up the transactional leadership typology: contingent reward, management by exception-active, and management by exception-passive. The contingent reward system serves as positive reinforcement of the desired behaviors in the workplace, and is based on the leader’s efforts to satisfy follower needs in exchange for desired performance outcomes (Bass, 1985; Barbuto; Jung & Avolio, 2000). This system of reward can yield effective results, but does not place emphasis on follower personal development or the facilitation of trust and identification between the leader and the follower (Jung & Avolio). Bass described management by exception as taking action only when problems or failures occur. Active management by exception occurs when the leader attempts to preserve the status quo and does not consider trying to make improvements as long as things are going according to plan (Bass). Barbuto expanded upon this explanation, stating that active management by exception leadership is when the leader becomes involved in situations to enforce prearranged punishments associated with a given problem or failure, as necessary. This type of feedback is often negative and involves reprimands (Bass & Steidlmeier, 1999). In contrast, passive management by exception generally occurs when leaders do not get involved until it is absolutely necessary, and then tend to refuse to develop a plan of action when punishment is in order or problems occur (Barbuto; Bass).

Transformational Leadership in Virtual Environments

The applicability of transformational leader behaviors in an online classroom has yet to be examined. However, outcomes of transformational leadership in virtual organizational settings have been the focus of many studies. Virtual environments, both classroom and organizational, provide unique opportunities for leaders in terms of achieving goals, facilitating collaboration, and establishing strategic relationships, in addition to overcoming traditional barriers such as cost, location, time, and space (Eom, 2009). Eom found that transformational leader behaviors in virtual organizations led to employees’ increased trust in the leader and higher overall performance. Purvanova and Bono (2009) examined employee outcomes in terms of performance and satisfaction in virtual organizations compared to face-to-face organizations with leaders considered to display transformational behaviors of idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration. Results indicated that the more transformational leadership behaviors that are displayed by leaders, the more satisfied employees are. Additionally, Ruggieri (2009) examined the construct of transformational and transactional leadership in relation to follower outcomes in interactive virtual contexts. They discovered that transformational leaders are described by followers as oriented more toward the future and development of followers than are



transactional leaders (Ruggieri). These findings are consistent with Hoyt and Blascovich’s (2003) study, which observed higher levels of follower satisfaction with leaders displaying transformational leadership behaviors than those displaying transactional leadership behaviors in virtual interactive contexts. When led by a transformational leader, followers reported higher levels of satisfaction, motivation, empowerment, and cohesion (Hoyt & Blascovich; Ruggieri).

Instructors as Leaders

Since leadership is not routinely coupled with teaching, the exploration of the proposed relationship requires justification (Kuchinke, 1999). While instruction and organizational leadership are by no means identical, there are enough parallels and overlaps to warrant further investigation (Kuchinke). A number of scholars have noted that leadership theories are applicable to instruction (Baba & Ace, 1989; Cheng, 1994; Harvey, Royal, & Stout, 2003; Kuchinke; Pounder, 2003; Walumbwa, Wu, & Ojode, 2004). Both instruction and organizational leadership consist of complex interactions comprised of communication, control, and coordination of activities (Barnard, 1938; Kuchinke). Additionally, both leadership situations and classroom instruction are characterized by power differentials related to reward, coercion, expertise, and referent bases of power (Raven & French, 1958). Kramer and Pier (1999) claim that effective teaching requires a combination of patience, skill, expertise in a particular discipline, and expertise in the social dynamics of classroom interactions in order to create better student outcomes. Specifically, university instructors must be able to effectively manage the classroom and facilitate maximum student involvement if they desire to enhance student learning (Catt, Miller, & Schallenkamp, 2007). House and Podsakoff (1994) help bridge domains of instructor leadership and organizational leadership by saying that instructors influence students, shape their future development, focus their attention on specific tasks, and induct them into the field or profession in a manner similar to the way organizational leaders influence, initiate, focus attention, set direction, and coordinate activities toward a goal. An additional rationale for exploring the commonalities between the domain of instructor leadership and organizational leadership is the approach of the learning organization. Here, leaders evoke affective as well as cognitive responses by acting as role models, building commitment and pride, challenging existing ways of thinking, and expressing concern for the developmental needs of the individual (Kuchinke, 1999). In an empirical study by Darling, Darling, and Elliot (1999), leaders of learning organizations were found to serve as mentors and coaches, fostering work performance as well as learning in ways similar to educational instruction.

Studies have found that instructors who display idealized influence, intellectual stimulation, individualized consideration, and inspirational motivation can positively influence student behaviors, perceptions, and learning outcomes by providing support



and encouragement and building trust (Bolkan & Goodboy, 2009). Lee (2001) pointed out eight conditions for a distance educator’s success, many of which are reflective of transformational leadership: (a) recognition of follower need, (b) articulation of purpose and guide, (c) identification of structure, (d) innovation, (e) participation and support, and (f) the use of adequate resources. Marcus (2004) examined distance education and transformational leadership, and found that students perceive instructors as demonstrating transformational leadership when the instructor creates conditions for innovative change, enables students to share a vision and move toward its direction, and helps contribute to the creation of new ideas.

Behaviors of a Transformational Teacher

Studies by Ingram (1997) and Yuen and Cheng (2000) have found certain leadership behaviors to be important to successful transformational leadership for educators. Yuen and Cheng classified these behaviors as inspiring, social supporting, and enabling. Inspiring refers to building a vision and providing motivational tasks; social supporting refers to fostering a learning culture, facilitating support networks, and handling conflicts; and enabling refers to enhancing knowledge and skills and offering intellectual stimulation (Yuen & Cheng). Each of these behaviors have been empirically tested and found to increase employee motivation and satisfaction in an organizational setting, and to improve student cognitive, affective, and motivational outcomes in classroom settings (Bolkan & Goodboy, 2009; Gooty, Gavin, Johnson, Frazier, & Snow, 2009; Hardy et al., 2010, Hoehl, 2008; Ingram, 1997). Mulford and Silins (2003) posited that an instructor who is transformational focuses on individual students by providing moral support, showing appreciation for the work of individual students, and considering their opinion. Furthermore, a transformational instructor sets a respectful tone for interaction with students, demonstrates a willingness to change in light of new understandings, and establishes a classroom structure that promotes participative decision-making and delegation (Mulford & Silins). Mulford and Silins went on to state that transformational instructors work toward communicating school priorities and goals to students in an attempt to provide a sense of overall purpose, as well as have high expectations for students to be innovative and encourage students to reflect on what they are trying to achieve.

Instructor Transformational Leadership and Student Outcomes

The positive effects of transformational leadership in instruction are demonstrated at the student level through overall higher levels of student engagement due to instructor behaviors of inspirational motivation and intellectual stimulation (Kuchinke, 1999; Leithwood & Jantzi, 2000). Harvey et al. (2003) examined the effect of instructor transformational leadership on student outcomes and found that instructor transformational behaviors such as charisma and intellectual stimulation are the



primary predictors of student respect for an instructor, satisfaction with an instructor, and trust in an instructor. In addition, individualized consideration and intellectual stimulation are the primary predictors of student involvement (Harvey et al.). Griffith (2004) and Politis (2004) both conducted studies measuring instructor transformational leadership behaviors and student outcomes. Results indicated that student achievement, affective learning, motivation, knowledge management, and student evaluations of teacher credibility are positively correlated with transformational instructors who demonstrate encouragement, motivation, coaching, intellectual stimulation, and charisma (Bolkan & Goodboy, 2009; Griffith; Kuchinke; Politis). Additionally, student willingness to exert extra effort, their perceptions of instructor effectiveness, and their overall satisfaction with the instructor are all positively associated with instructor transformational leadership behaviors such as individualized consideration and intellectual stimulation (Walumbwa et al., 2004). Pounder (2008) also examined instructor leadership in a university setting and found positive correlations between instructor transformational leadership behaviors, specifically charisma, intellectual stimulation, and inspirational motivation, and extra effort from students, increased student satisfaction, and increased student perceptions of instructor effectiveness. Moreover, Hoehl (2008) found that instructor idealized influence and individualized consideration are significant predictors of student outcomes of affective learning, student evaluations of teacher credibility, and student motivation. Similarly, the results of Bolkan and Goodboy’s study indicated a strong correlation between instructor charisma, intellectual stimulation, and inspirational motivation and student cognitive learning, affective learning, state motivation, and communication satisfaction.

The Benefits of Transformational Leadership in Education

Many studies have set forth the recommendation that educators adopt a transformational style of teaching due to its beneficial implications for instruction and student learning outcomes (Bolkan & Goodboy, 2009; Goodboy & Myers, 2008; Griffith, 2004; Harvey et al., 2003; Hoehl, 2008; Goodboy, Martin, & Bolkan, 2009; Politis, 2004; Pounder, 2008; Walumbwa et al., 2004). The benefits of transformational instruction are not limited to student outcomes. Transformational instruction is positively correlated with lower faculty turnover rates, higher levels of faculty job satisfaction, increased faculty commitment to university reform and change, and faculty empowerment (Griffith, 2004; Jason, 2000; Leithwood & Jantzi, 2000). Adams and Hambright (2005) stated that today’s universities need to be learning organizations that are led by transformational leaders. Based on current literature, it is apparent that the practice of transformational leadership in educational contexts yields increased affective learning, student motivation, and student perceptions of instructor credibility (Hoehl).



Definition of Terms

Transformational leadership. Transformational leadership is defined as leadership behaviors that inspire followers, resulting in both leader and follower raising each other up to higher levels of morality, motivation, and performance based on four categories of leader behavior, including idealized influence, intellectual stimulation, individualized consideration, and inspirational motivation (Bass, 1985, 1999).

Idealized influence. The idealized influence component of transformational leadership, also referred to as charisma, encompasses the leader behaviors of vision communication, motivational language use, and serving as an example of what it means to carry out the proposed vision (Bass, 1999).

Inspirational motivation. Inspirational motivation occurs when transformational leaders also engage in behaviors that articulate expectations and reveal the leader’s commitment to the goals of the organization. These behaviors enhance the meaningfulness of followers’ work experiences and offer them challenging goals and opportunities (Bass, 1999).

Intellectual stimulation. Intellectual stimulation is defined as the transformational leader’s desire to challenge follower thinking about problem-solving strategies and promote creativity and innovation (Bass, 1999).

Individualized consideration. Individualized consideration refers to the leader’s actions that guide followers toward reaching their respective levels of potential. In this role, the leader acts as a mentor and coach, offering followers work opportunities that challenge their growth and development (Bass, 1999).

Transactional leadership. Transactional leadership is defined as a transaction or exchange among leaders, colleagues, and followers based on the leader discussing with others what is required and specifying the conditions and rewards that will be received if those requirements are fulfilled (Bass, 1985).

Student outcomes. For the purpose of this study, student outcomes are considered cognitive learning, affective learning, student perceptions of instructor credibility, and communication satisfaction.

Cognitive learning. For the purpose of this research, cognitive learning is defined as comprehending information, organizing ideas, analyzing and synthesizing data, applying knowledge, choosing among alternatives in problem-solving, and evaluating ideas or actions (Bloom, Hastings, & Madaus, 1971).



Affective learning. For the purpose of this study, affective learning is defined as student feelings, emotions, and degrees of acceptance toward the subject matter (Krathwohl, Bloom, & Masia, 1964).

Instructor credibility. For the purpose of this research, instructor credibility is defined as student perceptions of instructor competence, trustworthiness, and goodwill (Bolkan & Goodboy, 2009).

Communication satisfaction. Student communication satisfaction, for the intent of this study, is defined as an affective response to the accomplishment of communication goals and expectations (Hecht, 1978).

Statement of the Problem

Results from research examining transformational leadership in management make it clear that transformational leadership has its advantages in organizations (Banjeri & Krishnan, 2000; Barnett et al., 2001; Conger, 1999; Goodwin, Wofford, & Whittington, 2001; Hackman & Johnson, 2004; Ravlin & Meglino, 1989). More recently, a handful of scholars have begun to investigate the relationship between instructor transformational leadership behaviors and student learning outcomes (Blokan & Goodboy, 2009; Hoehl, 2008; Leithwood & Jantzi, 2006; Pounder, 2003). Overall, research studying transformational leadership in school and university settings is minimal, and an examination of these constructs within online courses is completely missing. This research provides a solution to this oversight by examining the link between instructor transformational leadership behaviors and student outcomes in terms of cognitive learning, affective learning, perceptions of instructor credibility, and communication satisfaction within distance education.

Theoretical Underpinnings

This study is based on transformational leadership theory, transactional leadership theory, and social learning theory to understand how instructor leadership behaviors affect student cognitive learning, affective learning, perceptions of instructor credibility, and communication satisfaction. The theoretical rationale supporting the proposed research design is based on transformational leadership theory research that has tested the relationship between transformational leadership behaviors (intellectual stimulation, individualized consideration, idealized influence, and inspirational motivation) and follower outcomes of increased performance and satisfaction, specifically in virtual environments (Eom, 2009; Hoyt & Blascovich, 2003; Purvanova & Bono, 2009; Ruggieri, 2009). These variables have been empirically tested in educational settings and linked to positive student outcomes (Bolkan & Goodboy, 2009; Goodboy & Myers, 2008; Hoehl, 2008; Pounder, 2008; Walumbwa et al., 2004). Kolb (1984) posited



that learning is the process whereby knowledge results from the combination of grasping and transforming experience. Bandura’s (1977) social learning theory states that people can learn by observing the behaviors of others. He posited that most human behavior is learned observationally through modeling. Through observing others, one forms an idea of how new behaviors are performed, and on later occasions this information serves as a guide for action (Bandura). Ormrod (1999) described social learning theory as a bridge between behaviorist learning theories and cognitive learning theories. Social learning theory encompasses motivation, emotion, cognitions, social re-enforcers, and self re-enforcers (Ormrod). Social learning theory ties to transformational leadership behaviors in the form of motivation (idealized influence), observation (individualized consideration: mentoring and coaching), and modeling (inspirational motivation: modeling appropriate behaviors). Students who perceive instructors as demonstrating encouragement, support, appreciation, charisma, and intellectual stimulation may demonstrate extra effort, participation, and trust in the instructor (Bolkan & Goodboy, 2009).

Stemming from social learning theory, which indicates that individuals learn through observations and modeling, consequently leading to learner motivation, cognition, and affect toward the subject matter, the stated student perceptions in turn lead to increases in student retention and synthesis of material (cognitive learning). In addition to increases in cognitive learning, the stated perceptions lead to increases in student feelings, emotions, and degrees of acceptance toward the subject matter (affective learning); increased perceptions of instructor trustworthiness, competence, and goodwill (instructor credibility); and increases in student affective responses to the accomplishment of communication goals and expectations (communication satisfaction) (Bloom et al., 1971; Bolkan & Goodboy, 2009; Hecht, 1978; Krathwohl et al., 1964; McCroskey & Young, 1981). Additionally, perceived instructor credibility is achieved through effective instruction based on student perceptions of positive interactions with the instructor, which in turn leads to increased student intent to take future courses from credible instructors and increased overall ratings of the instructor (Hoehl, 2008; Martin, Chesebro, & Mottet, 1997; McCroskey, Richmond, Plax, & Kearney, 1985; Schrodt & Witt, 2006). These variables are selected because they have each been associated with effective teaching behavior and increased effort and satisfaction on the part of the student (Goodboy & Myers, 2008; Pounder, 2008; Walumbwa et al., 2004). Given that instructors who display individualized consideration, intellectual stimulation, idealized influence, and inspirational motivation are perceived as more effective (Walumbwa et al.) and that students are more satisfied with instructors displaying these behaviors (Pounder, 2008), students should report increased learning outcomes compared to students viewing instructors as displaying transactional behaviors.



Research Hypotheses

The first hypothesis is derived from studies indicating that students report higher cognitive outcomes when taking courses from instructors who employ transformational leadership behaviors such as charisma, intellectual stimulation, inspirational motivation, and individualized consideration, compared to those who employ transactional behaviors (Bolkan & Goodboy, 2009; Goodboy & Myers, 2008; Pounder, 2008; Walumbwa et al., 2004).

H1: Instructor transformational leadership behaviors will have a stronger relationship with student cognitive learning than transactional leadership behaviors in online courses.

The second hypothesis is derived from the findings of Bolkan and Goodboy (2009), Griffith (2004), Hoehl, (2008), and Politis (2004), which all indicate a positive correlation between instructor transformational leadership behaviors and student affective learning outcomes of emotion and attitude toward the subject matter.

H2: Instructor transformational leadership behaviors will have a stronger relationship with student affective learning than transactional leadership behaviors in online courses.

The third hypothesis stems from literature contending that students have increased perceptions of instructor credibility toward instructors displaying transformational leadership behaviors compared to instructors displaying transactional leadership behaviors (Griffith, 2004; Harvey et al., 2003; Hoehl, 2008; McCroskey & Teven, 1999; Pounder, 2008; Walumbwa et al., 2004).

H3: Instructor transformational leadership behaviors will have a stronger relationship with student perceptions of instructor credibility than transactional leadership behaviors in online courses.

The fourth hypothesis is derived from previous research that indicates a positive correlation between instructor transformational leadership behaviors and student communication satisfaction (Bolkan & Goodboy, 2009; Goodboy et al., 2009; Harvey et al., 2003; Pounder, 2008; Walumbwa et al., 2004).

H4: Instructor transformational leadership behaviors will have a stronger relationship with student communication satisfaction than transactional leadership behaviors in online courses.



Method

Sample and Procedure

Due to time constraints in completing this research design, convenience sampling was used to select participants. Convenience sampling allows the researcher to draw a sample from the larger population, which is readily available and convenient (Bartlett, Kotrlik, & Higgins, 2001). Participants were graduate students enrolled in online Leadership programs at both Gonzaga University in Spokane, Washington and Regent University in Virginia Beach, Virginia. Program directors for each Master’s program were sent a letter explaining the study and requesting permission to contact enrolled students for participation. Once permission was granted, the questionnaire along with an e-mail explaining the research and a statement of informed consent were electronically delivered to potential participants. All instruments were combined in Survey Monkey to create one. In order to maintain participant confidentiality, the questionnaires were automatically and electronically returned via Survey Monkey services. The questionnaire was open for three weeks; from May 28, 2010 until June 21, 2010. The questionnaire was sent to 167 students; 112 students completed the survey, yielding a response rate of approximately 67 percent.

Bass and Avolio’s (1995) Multi-factor Leadership Questionnaire was used to measure student perceptions of transformational and transactional leadership; Frymier and Houser’s (1999) Revised Cognitive Learning Indicators Scale measured cognitive learning; McCroskey’s (1994) Affective Learning Scale measured affective learning; McCroskey and Young’s (1981) Teacher Credibility Scale measured student perceptions of instructor credibility; and Goodboy et al.’s (2009) Student Communication Satisfaction Scale measured student overall satisfaction with instructor communication. Strahan and Gerbasi’s (2006) Social Desirability Scale was also implemented to control for social desirability bias. In addition to the five existing instruments, participants were asked for basic information such as: (a) the number of semesters they had been enrolled in their graduate program, (b) the number of courses that they had previously taken from the specified instructor, and (c) their overall grade, up to that point, in the particular class.

Multi-Factor Leadership Questionnaire. Each participating student was given the transformational leadership and transactional leadership portion of Bass and Avolio’s (1997) Multi-factor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) to determine student perceptions of instructor transformational and transactional leadership. Originally developed by Bass (1985), the MLQ is the most widely used measure of transformational leadership behaviors (Carless, 1998). The MLQ measures a full range of leadership behaviors; however, for the purpose of this study, transformational and transactional characteristics were the only leadership behaviors measured. Transformational



assessment scales measure idealized attributes, idealized behaviors, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration (Bass). In addition, the MLQ allows the researcher to assess transformational leadership outcomes such as follower effort, effectiveness, and satisfaction (Bass & Avolio, 1995). Transactional assessment scales measure contingent reward and management-by-exception (Bass). Individual reliability analyses were conducted for the transformational and transactional components of the MLQ, with the transactional measurement yielding a Cronbach’s alpha of .67 and the transformational measurement yielding a Cronbach’s alpha of .97. The MLQ uses a 5-point Likert scale, with 0 representing ―not at all‖ and 4 representing ―frequently if not always.‖

Revised Cognitive Learning Indicators Scale. Each of the 112 participating students was given the Revised Cognitive Learning Indicators Scale (RCLIS). Frymier and Houser’s (1999) RCLIS is designed to measure student cognitive learning. It consists of seven items that ask participants to report on behaviors or activities associated with learning the course content. The RCLIS solicits responses using a 5-point Likert scale ranging from ―never‖ (0) to ―very often‖ (4) (Bolkan & Goodboy, 2009). Reliability analysis was conducted, resulting in a Cronbach’s alpha of .82, which is consistent with existing reliability scores in other samples of between .84 and .91 (Bolkan & Goodboy; Frymier & Houser).

Affective Learning Scale. To measure affective learning, McCroskey’s (1994) Affective Learning Scale (ALS) was completed by each participating student. The ALS is the most frequently used assessment for measuring student affect in terms of willingness to learn, use, and generalize information and skills learned in the classroom (Rubin et al., 2004). The ALS consists of two sets of measures, each with four bipolar adjective scales. Reliability analysis was conducted, resulting in a Cronbach’s alpha of .90, which is consistent with existing reliabilities in other samples of .85 to .90 (Rubin et al.).

Teacher Credibility Scale. All participants completed McCroskey and Young’s (1981) Teacher Credibility Scale, which serves as an assessment of student perceptions of instructors. McCroskey and Young use a two-dimensional approach to credibility that includes competence and character. The Teacher Credibility Scale is a 12-item semantic differential scale, with each item listing bipolar adjectives that can be used to describe a given instructor, on a seven-point scale (Hoehl, 2008). Student responses are recoded so that higher scores serve as indicators of teacher credibility (Rubin, Palmgreen, & Sypher, 2004). Reliability analysis was conducted resulting in a Cronbach’s alpha of .95, which is consistent with existing reliabilities of The Teacher Credibility Scale in other samples, of between .84 and .93 (Hoehl, 2008; McCroskey & Young, 1981; Rubin et al., 2004).



The Student Communication Satisfaction Scale. Participating students completed Goodboy, Martin, and Bolkan’s (2009) Student Communication Satisfaction Scale (SCSS), which serves as a global assessment of student satisfaction resulting from communication encounters with an instructor. More specifically, the SCSS assesses student attributional confidence in the instructor, affect for the course and instructor, and relational, functional, participatory, and sycophancy motives affecting student communication satisfaction. The SCSS is a 10-item scale that uses a 7-point Likert response format, ranging from ―strongly disagree‖ (1) to ―strongly agree‖ (7) (Goodboy et al.). Reliability analysis was conducted, resulting in a Cronbach’s alpha of .82, which is slightly lower than existing reliabilities in other samples of around .97 (Bolkan & Goodboy, 2009; Goodboy et al.).

Social Desirability Scale. Participating students also completed Strahan and Gerbasi’s (2006) Social Desirability Scale. The Social Desirability Scale is a 20-item True/False measurement which serves as an assessment of the tendency of respondents to reply in a manner that might be viewed favorably by others (Strahan & Gerbasi). The Social Desirability Scale is implemented in this study as a method of minimizing social desirability bias. Reliability of the Social Desirability Scale resulted in Cronbach’s alpha of .82, which is consistent with existing reliabilities in other samples of around .85 (Strahan & Gerbasi).

Analysis

Inferential statistics, specifically multiple linear regression analyses, were used to determine the level of support for each hypothesis. Prior to conducting the regression analyses, correlations between each variable were examined (see Table 1). The predictor variable, number of courses taken previously from the instructor, was found to be positively correlated with transformational leadership behaviors (p < .05). Variables correlated at p < .001 included cognitive learning with affective learning, instructor credibility, communication satisfaction, transformational leadership and transactional leadership. In addition, affective learning was positively correlated with instructor credibility, communication satisfaction, and transformational leadership (p < .001). Instructor credibility was positively correlated with communication satisfaction and transformational leadership (p < .001). Communication satisfaction was positively correlated with transformational leadership and transactional leadership, and transformational leadership is positively correlated with transactional leadership (p < .001).


Emerging Leadership Journeys, Vol. 4 Iss. 1, 2011, pp. 82-136. © 2011 School of Global Leadership & Entrepreneurship, Regent University ISSN 1930-806X, [email protected]

Table 1 Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlationsa

Variable M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

SIPb 4.08 2.97

NCIc 1.45 1.66 .14

Grade 1.11 .31 -.05 .08

Social Desire. 1.39 .10 .06 .02 .02

Cognitive learning 4.15 .57 .05 -.13 .00 .17

Affective learning 5.72 1.22 -.06 .07 -.01 .02 .51***

Instructor Cred.d 6.17 .96 .10 .13 -.07 -.05 .40*** .64***

Comm. Sat.e 5.07 .99 .11 .14 -.05 .06 .52*** .57*** .79***

Transform. Lead.f 3.70 1.03 .02 .21* -.03 .07 .52*** .56*** .77*** .82***

Transact. Lead.g 2.60 .56 -.07 .10 .14 .07 .34*** .09 .13 .34*** .42***

a n=112

b SIP= total number of semesters enrolled in the graduate program

c NCI= total number of courses taken from the specified instructor

d Instructor Cred.= student perceptions of instructor credibility

e Comm. Sat.= student communication satisfaction

f Transform. Lead.= Transformational Leadership

g Transact. Lead.= Transactional Leadership

*Correlation is significant at the .05 level (2-tailed). **Correlation is significant at the .01 level (2-tailed). ***Correlation is significant at the .001 level (2-tailed).



The first hypothesis suggests that instructor transformational leadership behaviors will have a stronger relationship with student cognitive learning than transactional leadership behaviors in online courses. During the first regression analysis, cognitive learning was entered as the dependent variable within the SPSS linear regression function. All control variables (grade, number of courses taken previously from the instructor, number of semesters enrolled in the graduate program, and social desirability) were entered into block 1 of 1, and transformational leadership and transactional leadership were entered into block 2 of 2 (see Table 2 for detailed beta values).

Table 2 Multiple Linear Regression for H1a

Variable Model 1 β Model 2 β

SIPb .06 .08

NCIc -.14 -.26**

Grade .01 .01

Social Desirability .17 .13

Transformational Leadership .50***

Transactional Leadership .15

R2 .05 .37

ΔR2 .32

F 1.41 10.20***

F for change 26.44***

a n=112; Dependent variable: Cognitive Learning

b SIP=total number of semesters enrolled in the graduate program


*p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001

The regression model was significant (F(6,105) = 10.20, p < .001). The model accounted for 37% of variance in cognitive learning. The R2 change was also significant (ΔR2 = .32, F(2,105) = 26.4, p < .001). The standardized coefficient for transactional leadership was not significant (β= .15, p = .08). The standardized coefficient for transformational leadership was significant (β = .50, p < .001); therefore H1 is supported.

The second hypothesis states that instructor transformational leadership behaviors will have a stronger relationship with student affective learning than transactional leadership behaviors in online courses. During this regression analysis, affective learning was entered as the dependent variable within the SPSS linear regression function. All control variables were entered into block 1 of 1, and transformational leadership and transactional leadership were entered into block 2 of 2 (see Table 3 for detailed beta values).



The regression model is significant (F(6,105) = 9.35, p < .001). The model accounted for 35% of variance in affective learning. The R2 change was also significant (ΔR2 = .34, F(2,105) = 27.14, p < .001). The standardized coefficient for transactional leadership was not significant (β = -.18, p = .07). The standardized coefficient for transformational leadership was significant (β = .65, p < .001); therefore, H2 is supported.



SIPb -.07 -.08

NCIc .09 -.03

Grade -.02 .03

Social Desirability .09 -.01


Transactional Leadership -.19

R2 .01 .35

ΔR2 .38

F .30 9.35***


a n=112; Dependent variable: Affective Learning



*p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001



SIPb .08 .08

NCIc .13 -.03

Grade -.07 -.01

Social Desirability -.06 -.09


Transactional Leadership -.22**

R2 .03 .65

ΔR2 .62

F .91 32.48***


a n=112; Dependent variable: Instructor Credibility





*p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001

The third hypothesis states that instructor transformational leadership behaviors will have a stronger relationship with student perceptions of instructor credibility than will transactional leadership behaviors in online courses. During this regression analysis, instructor credibility was entered as the dependent variable within the SPSS linear regression function. All control variables were entered into block 1 of 1, and transformational leadership and transactional leadership were entered into block 2 of 2 (see Table 4 for detailed beta values).

The regression model is significant F(6,105) = 32.48, p < .001). The model accounted for 65% of variance in instructor credibility. The R2 change was also significant (ΔR2 = .62, F(2,105) = 92.52, p < .001). The standardized coefficient for transformational leadership was significant (β = .87, p < .001), as was the standardized coefficient for transactional leadership (β = -.22, p < .01). Though both transformational and transactional leadership are significant predictors of perceptions of instructor credibility, H3 is supported since transformational leadership is a greater predictor of perceptions of instructor credibility.

The fourth hypothesis states that instructor transformational leadership behaviors will have a stronger relationship with student communication satisfaction than transactional leadership behaviors in online courses. During this regression analysis, communication satisfaction was entered as the dependent variable within the SPSS linear regression function. All control variables were entered into block 1 of 1, and transformational leadership and transactional leadership were entered into block 2 of 2 (see Table 5 for detailed beta values).



SIPb .08 .10

NCIc .14 -.04

Grade -.06 -.02

Social Desirability .06 .01


Transactional Leadership .01

R2 .03 .69

ΔR2 .65

F .95 38.37***




a n=112; Dependent variable: Communication Satisfaction



*p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001

The regression model is significant (F(6,105) = 38.37, p < .001). The model accounted for 69% of variance in communication satisfaction. The R2 change was also significant (ΔR2 = .65, F(2,105) = 109.34, p < .001). The standardized coefficient for transactional leadership was not significant (β= .01, p = .86). The standardized coefficient for transformational leadership was significant (β = .82, p < .001); therefore, H4 is supported.

Discussion

This study used regression analysis to determine the relationships of instructor transformational leadership and transactional leadership with student cognitive learning, affective learning, perceptions of instructor credibility, and communication satisfaction. The primary research goal was to determine the nature of these relationships and which type of instructor behaviors serve as the most significant predictors of student educational outcomes. It should be noted that all regression analyses controlled for grade, the number of courses taken thus far in the program, the number of total courses taken from the specified instructor, and social desirability. This study posited that instructor transformational leadership behaviors would have a greater affect on each of the four student outcomes than transactional leadership behaviors.

The first regression analysis, which represents the hypothesized relationship between instructor transformational leadership behaviors and student cognitive learning, revealed that instructor transformational behaviors are a significant predictor of student cognitive learning in online courses; thus H1 is supported (see Table 2). These findings are consistent with the literature addressing the relationship between the specified variables in traditional classrooms (Bolkan & Goodboy, 2009; Goodboy & Myers, 2008; Pounder, 2008; Walumbwa et al., 2004). These results also align with the intellectual stimulation component of transformational leadership behaviors of challenging problem solving skills and promoting innovation (Bass, 1999).

The next analysis addressed the hypothesized relationship between instructor transformational leadership behaviors and student affective learning. Findings indicate that instructor transformational behaviors are a significant predictor of student affective learning in online courses therefore; H2 is supported (see Table 3). This is consistent with existing literature examining this relationship in traditional classrooms (Bolkan & Goodboy, 2009; Griffith, 2004; Hoehl, 2008; Politis, 2004). These findings encompass the individualized consideration component of transformational leadership in which



leaders develop interpersonal relationships with followers, creating a mentoring relationship where the leader is able to establish goals for each follower based in their needs (Barnett et al., 2001). Behaviors of personal regard for students and concern are well supported in the literature in terms of their ability to improve student affective learning (Hoehl). The findings of this study are also consistent with Banjeri and Krishnan (2000), who found that followers describe their charismatic leaders as those who make everyone enthusiastic about assignments, command respect, have a gift of seeing what is important, and transmitting a sense of mission to followers, which aligns with Krathwohl et al.’s (1964) definition of affective learning as positive feelings towards the subject matter, instructor, and coursework. Therefore, teachers who make students feel enthusiastic about coursework and assignments are more likely to have students who enjoy the course and have higher levels of affective learning (Hoehl).

The third analysis represented the hypothesized relationship between instructor transformational leadership behaviors and student perceptions of instructor credibility. Results reveal that instructor transformational behaviors are a significant predictor of student perceptions of instructor credibility in online courses (p < .001); however, transactional leadership also has a (lower) significant effect on perceptions of instructor credibility (p < .01) (see Table 3). Since it was proposed that students perceiving instructors as displaying more transformational leadership behaviors than transactional behaviors would have higher perceptions of instructor credibility, H3 is supported. The positive relationship between instructor transformational leadership behaviors and student perceptions of instructor credibility is consistent with existing literature examining the constructs in traditional classrooms (Griffith, 2004; Harvey et al., 2003; Hoehl, 2008; McCroskey & Teven, 1999; Pounder, 2008; Walumbwa et al., 2004). In addition, these findings are aligned with the idealized influence and inspirational motivation components of transformational leadership. Specifically, Banjeri and Krishnan (2000) found that the extent to which instructors command respect, articulate expectations, and demonstrate commitment to shared goals is an indicator of the instructor’s perceived credibility.

The fourth analysis, which represented the hypothesized relationship between instructor transformational leadership behaviors and student communication satisfaction, reveals that instructor transformational behaviors are a significant predictor of student communication satisfaction in online courses; therefore, H4 is supported (see Table 4). These findings are consistent with literature examining the stated variables in traditional classroom settings (Bolkan & Goodboy, 2009; Goodboy et al., 2009; Harvey et al., 2003; Pounder, 2008; Walumbwa et al., 2004). Specifically, the idealized influence component of transformational leadership involves communicating a vision, using motivational language, and articulating the means to carry out the vision (Bass, 1999), which has been positively related to communication satisfaction from student to instructor (Bolkan & Goodboy).



Summary of the Study

The outcomes of transformational leadership and transactional leadership have been well researched in leadership literature and have received some attention in educational literature. However, these concepts have not been researched in online courses to determine the potential impact of these behaviors with respect to student outcomes (Hoehl, 2008). The analyses of this study revealed that instructor transformational leadership behaviors are greater predictors of student cognitive learning, affective learning, perceptions of teacher credibility, and communication satisfaction than transactional behaviors.

Implications

The results of this study have significant implications for the application of transformational leadership in online courses. Transformational behaviors that are associated with idealized influence, inspirational motivation, individualized consideration, and intellectual stimulation can be implemented and evaluated within online courses, thus leading to increased student outcomes. Instructors have the opportunity to exhibit these behaviors in their course syllabi, assignment structure, online dialogues, assignment feedback, and e-mail communication with students. Educators can integrate the idealized influence, inspirational motivation, and intellectual stimulation components of transformational behaviors by using motivational language in the syllabus to describe course content, dialogue topics, and assignments. In addition, instructors can use these aspects of the course to clearly articulate a vision of the learning outcomes students can expect. Online curriculum developers should consider creating assignments and dialogue topics reflective of intellectual stimulation that allows students to express their creativity and to be innovative in problem solving. Beyond the course design and curriculum, instructors have the opportunity to display idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration in all of their interactions with students. Specifically, instructors are able to demonstrate individualized consideration by treating each student as an individual and assisting them in their personal growth and development so they are able to reach their full potential. This can be communicated through dialogue interactions, personal e-mails, and phone conversations with students. In summation, these strategies offer instructors the opportunity to improve the cognitive and affective learning outcomes of students in addition to increasing student communication satisfaction and student perceptions of instructor credibility.

Limitations

As with any research design, there are potential weaknesses to this study. Convenience sampling was used from two private, mid-sized universities in the United States. Creswell (2009) noted that the use of convenience sampling can limit the generalizability of a study’s findings and can compromise the representativeness of the



sample to the population. Future research should consider broadening the scope of the sample to include a variety of universities of varying sizes and affiliations. In addition, varying geographic and cultural regions were not considered in the present study. Goodboy and Bolkan (2009) posited that students from different geographic or cultural regions might respond to transformational and transactional behaviors from instructors in a variety of ways. Pounder (2008) noted that insufficient work has been done to examine how transformational leadership can be replicated across cultural settings. Therefore, while it may be true that instructor transformational behaviors are valued in North America, the same may not be true in other cultures. An additional limitation of this design is the use of survey data collection. Kerlinger and Lee (2000) stated that typically, survey research does not penetrate as deeply below the surface of an issue as other research methodologies, and is also subject to sampling error. Furthermore, Hair et al. (2006) stated that multiple regression allows the researcher to ascertain relationships, but cannot guarantee the underlying causal mechanism. Lastly, there are potential extraneous variables, such as the structure of the online course and the course materials, which could potentially affect student perceptions of instructor behaviors and the resulting outcomes.

Recommendations for Future Research

Given the limitations of this design, there are several areas that should be explored by future researchers. To increase the generalizability of the findings, future research should focus on using a larger sample from a variety of institutions. Cross-cultural examinations of the constructs explored in this study would also benefit from further study. In addition, it would be beneficial for future research to examine the specific components of transformational leadership, idealized influence, intellectual stimulation, inspirational motivation, and individualized consideration in respect to specific student outcomes in online courses. This would allow educators to identify the extent to which specific transformational behaviors influence specific student outcomes. An examination of additional student outcomes such as motivation, grades, and overall satisfaction would aid in creating a more comprehensive picture of the effects of instructor transformational behaviors on overall student outcomes. Further research on how to promote instructor transformational leadership behaviors within online courses would be useful to higher education institutions. Additional qualitative studies would be beneficial in offering insights into the actual experiences of students and the impact of specific instructor behaviors on student attitudes and outcomes in online courses.

The outcome of this study is intended to provide a starting point for understanding the impact of instructor transformational behaviors on student outcomes in online courses. Based on the results, it is evident that transformational behaviors, more so than transactional behaviors, lead to increased student cognitive learning, affective learning, perceptions of instructor credibility, and communication satisfaction within online courses. It is hoped that instructors, educational leaders, and curriculum designers can



integrate transformational behaviors into online courses; thus increasing student outcomes.

About the Author

Janelle Harrison is an adjunct faculty member in the Master’s of Management program at Spring Arbor University and is presently working toward a doctorate in organizational leadership with emphasis in human resource development at Regent University. She holds a Bachelor of Science in Psychology from Lewis-Clark State College, and a Master of Arts in Communication and Leadership Studies from Gonzaga University. Her primary research interests lie in distance education, autonomous learning, and online instructional leadership.

References

Adams, K., & Hambright, G. (2005). Helping teachers become transformational leaders. Academic Exchange Quarterly, 9(2), 90-94. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from ProQuest Education Journals.

Avolio, B. J., Bass, B. M., & Jung, D. I. (1999). Re-examining the components of transformational and transactional leadership using the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 72(4), 441-462.

Baba, V. V., & Ace, M. E. (1989). Serendipity in leadership: Initiating structure and consideration in the college classroom. Human Relations, 42, 509-525.

Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. New York: General Learning Press.

Banjeri, P., & Krishnan, V. R. (2000). Ethical preferences of transformational leaders: An empirical investigation. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 21(8), 405-413.

Barbuto, J. E. (2005). Motivation and transactional, charismatic, and transformational leadership: A test of antecedents. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 11(4), 26-41. Retrieved March 30, 2010, from Academic Search Complete.

Barnard, C. I. (1938). The functions of the executive. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.

Barnett, K., McCormick, J., & Conners, R. (2001). Transformational leadership in schools—panacea, placebo, or problem? Journal of Educational Administration, 39(1), 24-46. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from ProQuest Education Journals.



Bartlett, J. E., II, Kotrlik, J. W., & Higgins, C. (2001). Organizational research: Determining appropriate sample size for survey research. Information Technology, Learning, and Performance Journal, 19(1) 43–50.

Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Free Press.

Bass, B. M. (1999). Two decades of research and development in transformational leadership. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 8(1).

Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1994). Improving organizational effectiveness through transformational leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1995). Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire. Redwood City, CA: Mind Garden.

Bass, B. M., & Steidlmeier, P. (1999). Ethics, character, and authentic transformational leadership behavior. Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 181-217. Retrieved March 30, 2010, from ABI/Inform.

Bloom, B. S., Hastings, J. T., & Madaus, G. F. (1971). Handbook on formative and summative evaluation of student learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Bolkan, S., & Goodboy, A. (2009). Transformational leadership in the classroom: Fostering student learning, student participation, and teacher credibility. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 36(4), 296-306. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from ProQuest Education Journals.

Brown, L. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2001). Exploring the relationship between learning and leadership. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 22(6), 274-280. Retrieved March 30, 2010, from ABI/Inform.

Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row.

Carless, S. A. (1998). Assessing the discriminant validity of transformational leadership behavior as measured by the MLQ. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 71(4). Retrieved March 30, 2010, from ABI/Inform.

Catt, S., Miller, D., & Schallenkamp, K. (2007).You are the key: Communicate for learning effectiveness. Education, 127, 369-377. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from Academic Search Complete.

Cheng, Y. C. (1994). Teacher leadership style: A classroom-level study. Journal of Education Administration, 32, 54-71. Retrieved March 30, 2010, from ProQuest Education Journals.



Conger, J. A. (1999). Charismatic and transformational leadership in organizations: An insider’s perspective on these developing streams of research. Leadership Quarterly, 10, 145-179. Retrieved March 30, 2010, from ABI/Inform.

Corrigan, P. W., & Garman, A. N. (1999). Transformational and transactional leadership skills for mental health teams. Community Mental Health Journal, 35(4), 301. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from ABI/Inform.

Darling, J., Darling, P., & Elliott, J. (1999). The changing role of the trainer. London: Institute of Personnel and Development.

Eom, M. (2009). Cross-cultural virtual team and its key antecedents to success. The Journal of Applied Business and Economics, 10(1), 1-14. Retrieved April 5, 2010, from ABI/INFORM Global.

Frymier, A. B., & Houser, M. L. (1999). The revised learning indicators scale. Communication Studies, 50, 1-12. Retrieved March 30, 2010, from ProQuest Education Journals.

Goodboy, A. K., Martin, M. M., & Bolkan, S. (2009). The development and validation of the student communication satisfaction scale. Communication Education, 58(3), 372-396. Retrieved March 30, 2010, from ABI/Inform.

Goodboy, A. K., & Myers, S. A. (2008). The effect of teacher confirmation on student communication and learning outcomes. Communication Education, 57, 153-179. Retrieved March 30, 2010, from ProQuest Education Journals.

Goodwin, V. L., Wofford, J. C., & Whittington, J. L. (2001). A theoretical and empirical extension to the transformational leadership construct. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22, 759-774. Retrieved March 30, 2010, from Academic Search Complete.

Gooty, J., Gavin, M., Johnson, P., Frazier, M., & Snow, D. (2009). In the eyes of the beholder: Transformational leadership, positive psychological capital, and performance. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 15(4), 353. Retrieved March 30, 2010, from ABI/INFORM Global.

Griffith, J. (2004). Relation of principal transformational leadership to school staff job satisfaction, staff turnover, and school performance. Journal of Educational Administration, 42(3), 333-356. Retrieved March 30, 2010, from ProQuest Education Journals.

Hackman, M. Z., & Johnson, C. E. (2004). Leadership: A communication perspective (4th ed.). Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press.



Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearsons Prentice Hall.

Hardy, L., Arthur, C., Jones, G., Shariff, A., Munnoch, K., Isaacs, I., & Allsopp, A. (2010). The relationship between transformational leadership behaviors, psychological, and training outcomes in elite military recruits. Leadership Quarterly, 21(1), 20. Retrieved March 30, 2010, from ABI/INFORM Global.

Harvey, S., Royal, M., & Stout, D. (2003). Instructor’s transformational leadership: University student attitude and ratings. Psychological Reports, 92, 395-402.

Hecht, M. L. (1978). The conceptualization and measurement of interpersonal communication satisfaction. Human Communication Research, 4, 253-264. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from Academic Search Complete.

Hoehl, S. (2008). The relationship between transformational leadership and student educational outcomes as moderated by verbal and nonverbal immediacy. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation) Regent University, Virginia Beach, VA. Retrieved March 22, 2010, from Dissertations & Theses @ Regent University. (Publication No. AAT 3309288).

House, R. J., & Podsakoff, P. M. (1994). Leadership effectiveness: Past perspectives and future directions for research. In J. Greenberg (Ed.), Organizational behavior: The state of the science (pp. 45-82). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Hoyt, C. L., & Blascovich, J. (2003). Transformational and transactional leadership in virtual and physical environments. Small Group Research, 34, 678-715.

Ingram, P. (1997). Leadership behaviors of principals in inclusive educational settings. Journal of Educational Administration, 35(5), 411-427. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from ProQuest Education Journals.

Jason, M. H. (2000). The role of principal as transformational leader in a multicultural learning community. High School Journal, 83(3), 1-9. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from ProQuest Education Journals.

Jung, D. I., & Avolio, B. (2000). Opening the black box: An experimental investigation of the mediating effects of trust and value congruence on transformational and transactional leadership. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21, 949-964. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from Academic Search Complete.

Kent, T. W., Crotts, J. C., & Azziz, A. (2001). Four factors of transformational leadership behavior. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 22(5), 221-229. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from ABI/Inform.



Kerlinger, F. N., & Lee, H. B. (2000). Foundations of behavioral research (4th ed.). Harcourt College Publishers.

Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, N.J.

Kramer, M. W., & Pier, P. M. (1999). Students’ perceptions of effective and ineffective communication by college teachers. Southern Communication Journal, 65, 16-33. Retrieved March 30, 2010, from ProQuest Education Journals.

Krathwohl, D. R., Bloom, B. S., & Masia, B. B. (1964). Taxonomy of education objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook 2: Affective domain. New York: McKay.

Kuchinke, K. (1999). Workforce education faculty as leaders: do graduate-level university instructors exhibit transformational leadership behaviors? Journal of Vocational Education Research, 24(4), 209-25. Retrieved April 5, 2010, from Education Full Text database.

Lee, J. (2001). Instructional support for distance education and faculty motivation, commitment, satisfaction. British Journal of Educational Technology 32(2), 153-160. Retrieved March 30, 2010, from ProQuest Education Journals.

Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2006). Transformational school leadership for large-scale reform: Effects on students, teachers, and their classroom practices. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 17, 201-227. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from ProQuest Education Journals.

Marcus, S. (2004). Leadership in distance education: Is it a unique type of leadership? Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 7(1). Retrieved March 1, 2010, from ProQuest Education Journals.

Martin, M. M., Chesebro, J. L., & Mottet, T. P. (1997). Students’ perceptions of instructors’ socio-communicative style and the influence on instructor credibility and situational motivation. Communication Research Reports, 14, 431-440.

McCroskey, J. C. (1994). Assessment of affect toward communication and affect toward instruction in communication. In S. Morreale & M. Brooks (Eds.), 1994 SCA summer conference proceedings and prepared remarks: Assessing college student competence in speech communication. Annandale, VA: Speech Communication Association.

McCroskey, J. C., Richmond, V. P., Plax, T. G., & Kearney, P. (1985). Power in the classroom: Behavior alteration techniques, communication training and learning. Communication Education, 34, 214-226.



McCroskey, J. C., & Young, T. J. (1981). Ethos and credibility: The construct and its measurement after decades. Central States Speech Journal, 32, 24-34. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from Academic Search Complete.

Ormrod, J.E. (1999). Human learning (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Politis, J. D. (2001). The relationship of various leadership styles to knowledge management. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 22(8), 354-364. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from Academic Search Complete.

Pounder, J. S. (2003). Employing transformational leadership to enhance the quality of management development instruction. The Journal of Management Development, 22, 6-13. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from ABI/Inform.

Pounder, J. S. (2008). Transformational classroom leadership: A novel approach to evaluating classroom performance. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33, 233-243. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from ABI/Inform.

Purvanova, R., & Bono, J. (2009). Transformational leadership in context: Face-to-face and virtual teams. Leadership Quarterly, 20(3), 343. Retrieved April 1, 2010, from ABI/INFORM Global.

Raven, B. H., & French, J. (1958). Legitimate power coercive power, and observability in social influence. Sociometry, 21, 83-97. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.

Ravlin, E. C., & Meglino, B. M. (1989). The transitivity of work values: Hierarchical preference ordering of socially desirable stimuli. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 44(3), 494-509.

Rubin, R. B., Palmgreen, P., & Sypher, H. E. (Eds.). (2004). Communication research measures: A sourcebook. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Ruggieri, S. (2009). Leadership in virtual teams: A comparison of transformational and transactional leaders. Social Behavior & Personality: An International Journal, 37(8), 1017-1021. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.

Schrodt, P., & Witt, P. L. (2006). Students’ attributions of instructor credibility as a function of students’ expectations of instructional technology use and nonverbal immediacy. Communication Education, 55, 1-20.

Strahan, R., & Gerbasi, K. C. (2006). Short, homogeneous versions of the Marlow-Crowne social desirability scale. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 28(2), 191-193.



Walumbwa, F. O., Wu, C., & Ojode, L. A. (2004). Gender and instructional outcomes: The mediating role of leadership style. The Journal of Management Development, 23, 124-140. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from ProQuest Education Journals.

Yuen, P. Y., & Cheng, Y. C. (2000). Leadership for teachers’ action learning. International Journal of Educational Management, 14(5), 198-209. Retrieved March 1, 2010, from ProQuest Education Journals.

Yukl, G. (2006). Leadership in Organizations (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.

Spirituality and Servant Leadership: A Conceptual Model and Research Proposal

GT Freeman Regent University

With confidence shaken in contemporary business leadership, there has been an increased interest in Greenleaf’s (1977) servant leadership theory, which promotes setting aside self-interest of leaders for the betterment of their followers (Liden, Wayne, Zhao, & Henderson, 2008; Sendjaya, Sarros, & Santora, 2008). However, while there has been increased research in the development of conceptual models and questionnaires, there is still little known about the conditions that facilitate servant leadership (Yukl, 2010). This paper explores the concept of spirituality, and its effect on the formation and effectiveness of servant leadership. A proposed conceptual model postulates spiritual beliefs (e.g., hope and faith in God) as a causal factor in the formation of a servant leader’s values and behaviors. Furthermore, the model posits that spiritual practices (e.g., praying, meditating, and reading scripture) are a moderating variable of servant leadership behavior and the outcome variable, leadership effectiveness, as perceived by followers. The paper reveals hypothesized relationships between four variables and proposes methods for measuring and testing the propositions.

Greenleaf (1977) proposed the concept of servant leadership, in which service to followers, the essence of leadership, is the primary responsibility of leaders. Although developments of servant leadership models (Parolini, 2004; Patterson, 2003; Russell & Stone, 2002; Winston, 2003; Wong & Page, 2003) and questionnaires (Barbuto & Wheeler, 2006; Dennis & Bocarnea, 2005; Dennis & Winston, 2003; Liden, Wayne, Zhao, & Henderson, 2008) have encouraged recent research, little is known about the conditions that facilitate servant leadership (Yukl, 2010). While conceptual models posit that certain values (e.g., integrity, humility, servanthood, and agapao love) are causal factors that lead to servant leadership, these models do not postulate the source of those values. Reflecting on the facilitating conditions of servant leadership, Yukl (2010) asked, ―Is it related to personality and more likely to occur for some types of leaders than for others?‖ (p. 421). Spirituality (i.e., spiritual beliefs and practices) is one potential factor in the forming and fostering of servant leaders. Historically, spirituality and leadership theories have ―been worlds apart‖; however, a recent and increasing body of evidence has revealed these fields are related (Reave, 2005, p. 655). Both academic theory (Fry, 2003; Kriger & Seng, 2005) and research (Dent, Higgins, & Wharff, 2005; Reave, 2005) provide support for the relationship between spirituality and leadership.

Spirituality and Servant Leadership: A Conceptual Model and Research Proposal P a g e | 121


This paper addresses the following research question: How does a leader’s spiritual beliefs (hope and faith) and spiritual practices (works) affect servant leadership behaviors and leadership effectiveness, as perceived by the follower? To answer this question, the paper examines the academic literature on spirituality and servant leadership. A proposed conceptual model, adapted from the literature, presents spiritual beliefs (e.g., hope and faith in God) as a causal factor in the formation of the values and behaviors of servant leaders. Moreover, the model suggests that spiritual practices (e.g., praying, meditating, and reading scripture) moderate the relationship between servant leadership behaviors and leadership effectiveness as perceived by followers. Associated with the model are testable propositions, hypothesizing a positive relationship between spiritual beliefs, servant leadership behaviors, spiritual practices, and leadership effectiveness. The proposed spirituality-servant leadership construct contains four measurable variables: (a) spiritual beliefs, an independent variable measured by a subset of Fetzer’s (1999) Brief Multidimensional Measure of Religiousness/Spirituality (BMMRS); (b) servant leadership behavior, a mediating variable measured by Liden et al.’s (2008) Servant Leadership Scale; (c) leadership effectiveness, an outcome variable measured by a modified version of Denison, Hooijberg, and Quinn’s (1995) Leadership Effectiveness Survey; and (d) spiritual practices, a moderating variable measured by items in the BMMRS instrument related to the Spiritual Practices domain. Finally, this paper discusses methods for testing the hypothesized positive relationships between these variables.

Spirituality Literature Review

In an introduction to a special issue on spirituality in The Leadership Quarterly, Fry (2005) noted that ―issues regarding workplace spirituality have been receiving increased attention… and the implications…for leadership theory, research, and practice make this a fast growing area of new research and inquiry‖ (p. 619). An examination of the academic research reveals three areas of focus for scholars: (a) identifying spiritual values and behaviors, (b) examining conceptual frameworks and models pertaining to spirituality, and (c) developing instruments for measuring spirituality.

Spiritual Values and Behaviors

According to Fry (2003), spirituality includes two essential elements in a person’s life: (a) transcendence of self, manifesting in a sense of calling or destiny, and (b) belief that one’s activities have meaning and value beyond economic benefits or self-gratification. A sense of calling and higher meaning fosters the development of certain values, including vision (i.e., defining the destination, reflecting high ideals, and encouraging hope/faith), altruistic love (i.e., forgiveness, kindness, integrity, empathy, honesty, patience, courage, trust, and humility), and hope/faith (i.e., endurance, perseverance, and expectation of reward/victory). Kriger and Hanson (1999) proposed a similar set of spiritual values—honesty/truthfulness, trust, humility, forgiveness, compassion,



thankfulness, service, and stillness/peace—that are essential for enabling spiritual ideals to thrive and to grow in modern organizations. However, neither Fry nor Kriger and Hanson proposed potential sources of these spiritual values.

Reave (2005) conducted an exhaustive review of the literature and noted that spirituality expresses itself in the embodiment of spiritual values (i.e., integrity, trust, ethical influence, honest communication, and humility) and spiritual behaviors (i.e., demonstrating respect, treating others fairly, expressing care and concern, listening responsively, appreciating the contributions of others, and engaging in spiritual practice). Reave noted that none of the authors examined in the literature review proposed potential sources of spirituality, other than commenting that ―spiritual faith‖ is not required for practicing spirituality (p. 657). Perhaps, this is due to a fear that clearly defining spirituality could lead to dogmatic rigidity (Markow & Klenke, 2005), and the belief that spirituality should not be constrained by the doctrine of any one particular faith or religion (Yukl, 2010).

Models of Spirituality

While there are numerous conceptions of spirituality in leadership, there has been a lack of clarity in construct definitions (Markow & Klenke, 2005). One construct, proposed by Fry (2003), explains spirituality in leadership within an intrinsic motivation model that incorporates vision, altruistic love, and hope/faith; theories of workplace spirituality and spiritual survival; and the organizational outcomes of commitment and productivity. In this model, spirituality encompasses the values, attitudes, and behaviors necessary for intrinsically motivating self and followers to have a sense of spiritual survival through calling and membership (Fry). However, Fry did not comment on the source of the leader’s spirituality, probably to avoid any controversy about implied support for a particular faith or religion, one potential source of spirituality (Yukl, 2010).

Another construct of spirituality in leadership is Kriger and Seng’s (2005) extension of Yukl’s (2002) Multiple Linkage Model. Kriger and Seng argued that spirituality affects leader values; which moderates the effect of leader vision on leader behavior; which in turn affects the level of subordinate commitment to the leader’s vision and goals; which ultimately affects leadership effectiveness as measured by a firm’s profit, realization of values and vision, and collective organizational good to society and key stakeholders. Unlike Fry (2003), Kriger and Seng attempted to define religious faith as a legitimate source of spiritual values and behaviors. They defined a variable, identified as ―?,‖ which refers to Yahweh, God, Allah, Shiva, or Buddha, respectively within the religious traditions of Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism. However, since the concept of God is for some religions ―beyond all names,‖ Kriger and Seng used ―?‖ to refer to that which is ontologically beyond names and, hence, uncreated (p. 790). This ―?‖ possibly is: (a) a ―socially constructed reality‖ which is created by those with



religious beliefs, (b) an ―emerging reality‖ which is co-created between human beings and ―God,‖ or (c) a ―Being‖ which is real unto itself (Kriger & Seng, p. 790).

For the purposes of this paper, the causal or independent variable of spiritual beliefs is adapted from Kriger and Seng’s (2005) concept of God. Spiritual beliefs include having faith and hope in a personal and loving God, desiring to be close to God, and having a higher calling to serve God. Spiritual practices, similar to Kriger and Seng’s concept of inner leadings, include praying, meditating, and reading scripture. However, the model presented in this paper, unlike Kriger and Seng’s construct, also proposes an instrument for measuring spirituality.

Instrument for Measuring Spirituality

One instrument for measuring spirituality is Fetzer’s (1999) Multidimensional Measure of Religiousness/Spirituality (MMRS). Given its comprehensive nature, the MMRS has become the standard measure of religiousness and spirituality (Koenig, 2008). The long form of the MMRS consists of 128 questions. The Brief Multidimensional Measure of Religiousness/Spirituality (BMMRS), a shorter form of the comprehensive instrument, consists of 38 items. Descriptive statistics and reliability coefficients are available for each question on the BMMRS. In a study of 1445 participants, the Cronbach alpha coefficients were calculated, ranging from 0.64 to 0.91 (Rippentrop, Altmaier, Chen, Found, & Keffala, 2005). A subset of the BMMRS (see Appendix A) contains 23 statements pertaining to spiritual beliefs (Spiritual Beliefs, Spiritual Experiences, and Spiritual Coping domains) and spiritual practices (Spiritual Practices domain).

Servant Leadership Literature Review

Greenleaf’s (1977) concept of servant leadership describes service to followers, the essence of leadership, as the primary responsibility of leaders. Greenleaf emphasized that the servant leader is a servant first with the primary imperative to ensure the other’s highest priority needs are being served, which enables followers, while being served, to ―become healthier, wiser, freer, more autonomous, more likely themselves to become servants‖ (Greenleaf, p. 27). The core of the servant leadership model is based on four tenets of moral authority: Conscience, the essence of moral authority, (a) is sacrifice, (b) inspires commitment to a worthy cause, (c) teaches that ends and means are inseparable, and (d) introduces the world of relationships (Greenleaf, pp. 6-9).

A majority of the reviews of the literature on servant leadership begin with Greenleaf’s (1977) seminal work (Irving, 2004). In recent years, there has been an increased interest in the study of servant leadership. This research, which includes a wide range of concepts, has focused on identifying the values and behaviors of servant leadership, examining conceptual frameworks and models, and developing instruments for measuring servant leadership (Northouse, 2010).



Servant Leadership Values and Behaviors

There is significant discussion in the academic literature regarding a servant leader’s values and behaviors, and their influence on leader effectiveness (Irving, 2004). According to Rinehart (1998), leadership models are rooted in values. The values of a servant leader include having a guiding vision and purpose (Farling, Stone, & Winston, 1999), loving others (Banutu-Gomez, 2004; Whetstone, 2002; Wilson, 1998), trusting and empowering others (Marquardt, 2000; Russell, 2001), and submitting to others (Ndoria, 2004; Sendjaya, 2003). These values can be summed up in the concept of caring (for others, institutions, and society), which according to Greenleaf (1977) is the ―essential motive‖ of servant leadership (p. 255) and ―the rock upon which a good society is built‖ (p. 62). While there is significant commentary on servant leadership values (e.g., caring, loving, and submitting) in the literature, there is little discussion on the potential sources for these values, for example spiritual beliefs.

A servant leader’s behaviors emanate from their personal values (Errol & Winston, 2005; Irving, 2004; Maciariello, 2003; Russell, 2001), resulting in certain observed attributes such as establishing vision (Banutu-Gomez, 2004), being authentic (Sendjaya, 2003), focusing on relationships (Sendjaya), and influencing by modeling service to others (Banutu-Gomez; Whetstone, 2002). However, similar to discussions on spiritual values, there is little discussion in the academic literature on the reasons (i.e., causal factors) for why servant leaders practice certain behaviors.

Servant leadership literature also reveals a diverse set of outcomes (Irving, 2004), including increased trust between leader and follower (Errol & Winston, 2005), growth in followers (Rowe, 2003; Whetstone, 2002), empowerment of followers (Bowie, 2000; Lloyd, 1996; Wilson, 1998), reproduction of service by followers (Choi & Mai-Dalton, 1998; Stone, Russell, & Patterson, 2003), and enhanced individual, team, and organizational performance (Bennett, 2001). While these discussions about the values, behaviors, and outcomes further the conceptual understanding of servant leadership, they do not propose clear causal relationships between these variables (Irving). However, the literature also contains servant leader-organization and leader-follower models that attempt to describe the causal relationships of servant leadership variables.

Models of Servant Leadership

A review of the literature reveals at least three conceptual leader-organization models (Russell & Stone, 2002; Wong & Page, 2003; Parolini, 2004) and two leader-follower models (Patterson, 2003; Winston, 2003) of servant leadership. While each model proposes certain values (e.g., core principles, character-orientation, and agapao love) as the independent variable driving servant leadership behaviors and ultimately leadership effectiveness, none of the models proposed a source for the model’s independent variable.



Russell and Stone (2002) evaluated the attributes of servant leaders and assimilated the servant leadership attributes into a rational model. They consolidated a list of 20 distinguishable characteristics found in servant leadership literature, and divided the list into a set of nine functional attributes (vision, honesty, integrity, trust, service, modeling, pioneering, appreciation of others, and empowerment) and 11 accompanying attributes (communication, credibility, competence, stewardship, visibility, influence, persuasion, listening, encouragement, teaching, and delegation). In the Russell and Stone model, values (i.e., independent variable representing core principles) affect servant leadership (i.e., dependent variable measured by the nine functional attributes), and is moderated by the 11 accompanying attributes (i.e., moderating variables). Moreover, servant leadership affects organizational performance, mediated by organizational culture and employee attitudes (i.e., intervening variables). Russell and Stone’s model is limited in that it neither defines the independent variable (i.e., values) nor hypothesizes a source of those values.

Wong and Page (2003) also developed a values-based conceptual framework and model for describing servant leadership. Their model recognizes 12 servant leadership attributes conceptually classified into four orientations: character-orientation (i.e., integrity, humility, and servanthood), people-orientation (i.e., caring for others, empowering others, and developing others), task-orientation (i.e., visioning, goal setting, and leading), and process-orientation (i.e., modeling, team building, and shared decision-making). Wong and Page used expanding concentric circles, with character-orientation as the innermost circle, followed by people-orientation, task-orientation, and process-orientation to visually represent the sequence in the development, practice, and influence of servant leadership. Additionally, Wong and Page developed an opponent-process model of servant leadership that takes into account the two opposing motivation forces of serving others and self-serving. Power and pride characterize self-seeking leadership, while humility and self-denial characterize servant leadership (Wong, 2003). Wong and Page’s model is limited in that it does not offer a causation or source of character-orientation, or desire to serve others, in the concentric circle and opponent-process model, respectively.

Parolini (2004) expanded Wong and Page’s (2003; Page & Wong, 2000) model and clarified the outcomes of servant leadership as increased organizational effectiveness, business performance, and financial performance. Parolini modeled Page and Wong’s (2000) conceptual framework for measuring servant leadership and expanded it using Quinn and Rohrbaugh’s (1981, 1983) and Hart and Quinn’s (1993) Competing Values Framework. Parolini posited that servant leaders are defined by their ability to bring integrity, humility, and servanthood into caring for, empowering, and developing others in carrying out the tasks and processes of visioning, goal setting, leading, modeling, team building, and shared-decision making. Moreover, servant leaders prioritize human resources, then open systems and internal processes, and finally,



rational goals in delivering optimized business performance, financial performance, and organizational effectiveness (Parolini, p. 9). However, since Parolini’s model is an extension of Wong and Page’s model, it too lacks a source or causation for the model’s independent variable, character-orientation.

A second conceptual model type focuses on the leader-follower relationship. According to Patterson (2003), servant leadership is a virtuous theory, based on a leader’s character—something within a person that is internal, almost spiritual. Patterson developed a model of servant leadership that encompasses seven virtuous constructs, which work in processional pattern: agapao love, humility, altruism, vision, trust, empowerment, and service. Patterson’s model begins with an agapao love construct (i.e., independent variable), by which the leader considers the needs, wants, and desires of each person. Five specific leader attributes (humility, altruism, vision, trust, and empowerment) are all mediating variables that lead to the dependent variable, service. Agapao love, the model’s independent variable, is the foundational cause of service. Winston (2003) remarked that Patterson’s (2003) leader-follower model improves on the leader-organization models by showing ―the causal relationships between the variables in order to build a process model of servant leadership‖ (p. 602). Winston proposed a circular extension of Patterson’s model that considered the importance and effects of the follower’s agapao love, in addition to the leader’s love. While Patterson and Winston noted that the leader’s character is spiritual in nature, their models do not explicitly give a causation or potential source (e.g., hope and faith in God) for the independent variable, agapao love.

Instruments for Measuring Servant Leadership

A literature review reveals instruments for measuring servant leadership in organizations (Laub, 2003; Sendjaya, Sarros, & Santora, 2008) and in individuals (Barbuto & Wheeler, 2006; Dennis & Bocarnea, 2005; Dennis & Winston, 2003; Liden et al., 2008).

Laub’s (2003) 66-item Organizational Leadership Assessment (OLA) measures three perspectives: the organization as a whole, its top leadership, and each participant’s personal experience. The instrument covers six areas of servant leadership characteristics: valuing people, developing people, building community, displaying authenticity, providing leadership, and sharing leadership (as cited in Wong & Page, 2003). The OLA has shown itself to be highly reliable (Cronbach alpha coefficient of 0.98) with strong construct and face validity, and consequently has been used in multiple research projects as well as for organizational diagnosis and consulting (Laub,).

Sendjaya et al. (2008) developed the Servant Leadership Behavior Scale, a multidimensional measure of servant leadership behavior. Sendjaya et al. reported both qualitative and quantitative studies to establish preliminary psychometric properties for



a 35-item instrument, measuring six-dimensions: voluntary subordination, authentic self, covenantal relationship, responsible morality, transcendental spirituality, and transforming influence. Lawshe’s (1975) content validity ratio was calculated and used to demonstrate the instrument’s content validity (as cited in Sendjaya et al.). Moreover, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to model the factor structures of the instrument, allowing independent analyses of both the measurement and structural components of the construct. The internal consistency reliabilities ranged from 0.72 to 0.93, exceeding the recommended level of 0.70 for Cronbach’s coefficient alpha (Nunnally, 1978, as cited in Sendjaya et al.).

To measure Page and Wong’s (2000) conceptual model of servant leadership, Dennis and Winston (2003) developed a 99-item scale and conducted a factor analysis that produced three factors: empowerment, service, and vision. The reliability or internal consistency values, measured by the Cronbach coefficient alpha, ranged from 0.89 to 0.97. There was no mention of any methods used for ensuring content, criterion, or construct validity.

Dennis and Bocarnea (2005) presented an instrument to measure Patterson’s (2003) construct of servant leadership. The researchers used three separate data collections to reduce a 71-item scale to 42 items yielding five factors: empowerment, love, humility, trust, and vision. They used De Vellis’ (1991) test development processes and scale development guidelines to ensure face and content validity (as cited in Dennis & Bocarnea). Empirical results of the study established both criterion-related and construct-related validity. Finally, Cronbach coefficient alphas ranged from 0.92 to 0.94, thereby validating the reliability of the study.

Barbuto and Wheeler (2006) reviewed the literature on servant leadership and developed 56 subscale items to measure 11 potential dimensions of servant leadership: calling, listening, empathy, healing, awareness, persuasion, conceptualization, foresight, stewardship, growth, and community building. They confirmed the factor structure and assessed convergent, divergent, and predictive validity. The results of the factor analysis derived five conceptually and empirically distinct servant leadership factors: altruistic calling, emotional healing, persuasive mapping, wisdom, and organizational stewardship. They also conducted data analysis on the five-factor construct and confirmed the revised 23-item instrument’s internal consistency (i.e., Cronbach’s coefficient alpha ranged from 0.82 to 0.92).

Liden et al. (2008) identified a servant leadership measure created by identifying nine dimensions. The researchers developed and subjected relevant items to factor analysis, resulting in a 7-factor solution. Liden et al. verified the 7-factor model with exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, and further validated a 28-item servant leadership scale by regressing outcomes on the servant leadership dimensions, controlling for transformational leadership and leader-member exchange (LMX) in a multi-level



hierarchical linear modeling analysis. Their results suggested that servant leadership is a multidimensional construct and at the individual level makes a unique contribution beyond transformational leadership and LMX in explaining community citizenship behaviors, in-role performance, and organizational commitment.

Defining and Measuring Leadership Effectiveness

While conceptions of leadership effectiveness differ from one writer to another, most researchers evaluate effectiveness in terms of the consequences of the leader’s influence on an individual, team, or organization (Yukl, 2010). According to Reave (2005), leadership effectiveness can be measured in two ways: (a) by achievement of organizational goals such as productivity and profit; or (b) by subjective evaluations from subordinates, peers, and superiors.

Both servant leadership and spirituality, separately, can increase leadership effectiveness and inspire higher individual and organizational performance since they increase mutual appreciation, affection, and trust among members of the organization (Yukl, 2010). Wong and Page’s (2003) servant leadership model conceptualizes effective leadership as an outcome variable. However, most evidence about the positive effects of servant leadership is from anecdotal accounts and case studies (Yukl). According to Fry (2003), spirituality can create vision and value congruence, fostering higher levels of individual commitment and performance. In an examination of the scholarly literature, Dent et al. (2005) noted an increased interest in linking spirituality and leadership effectiveness, and concluded that most researchers hypothesized a correlation between spirituality and leadership effectiveness, measured through organizational productivity. Reave’s (2005) exhaustive review of the literature showed a clear consistency between the constructs of spirituality and effective leadership. The review also included empirical studies that showed a positive relationship of spiritual beliefs (e.g., viewing work as a higher calling from God) and spiritual practices (e.g., meditating, reading scripture, and journaling) to individual leader effectiveness (Anderson, Levinson, Barker, & Kiewra, 1999; Alexander, Swanson, Rainforth, & Carlisle, 1993; Delbecq, 1999) and organizational performance (Paloutzian, Emmons, & Keortge, 2003; Wresniewski, McCauley, Rozin, & Schwartz, 1997).

One instrument for measuring leadership effectiveness is Denison et al.’s (1995) subjective evaluation model, an instrument consisting of questions related to leadership roles as perceived by a leader’s subordinates, as well as questions related to effectiveness as perceived by a leader’s superior. Denison et al.’s 21-item questionnaire empirically tested Quinn’s (1984) spatial model that described the leadership domain in terms of eight leadership roles. The first 16 questions relate to the eight leadership roles and had Cronbach coefficient alphas ranging from 0.61 to 0.87 (Denison et al.). The last five questions measure overall assessment of leadership effectiveness and are combined



into a single index measure. The coefficient alpha for the 5-item index was 0.83 (Denison et al.).

Servant Leadership-Spirituality Construct and Propositions

Given the similarities in the spirituality and servant leadership constructs, one could posit that servant leadership is contained within the construct of spirituality, in that servant leadership is a manifestation of altruistic love in the action of pursuing transcendent vision (Sendjaya et al., 2008). However, one could argue the contrary, whereby spirituality is the motivational basis for servant leaders to engage others in authentic and profound ways that transform them to be what they are capable of becoming. This view is more compelling, according to Sendjaya et al., since there are areas of divergence in the spiritual and servant leadership models.

There are areas of convergence and divergence between servant leadership and spirituality. Both the servant leadership and spirituality constructs appeal to virtuous leadership practices and intrinsic motivating factors to cultivate a sense of meaning and purpose. Both constructs attempt to facilitate an integrated workplace where individuals engage in meaningful and intrinsically motivating work (Sendjaya et al., 2008). This leadership orientation finds its expression through service, which becomes a source from which leaders derive meaning and purpose (Fry, 2003; Sendjaya et al.). Two of Fry’s three spiritual attributes (vision, altruistic love, and hope/faith) are contained in the servant leadership construct: vision (Russell & Stone, 2002; Wong & Page, 2003) and love (Patterson, 2003; Winston, 2003). Hope/faith is not conceptualized in current servant leadership models, but should be since servant leaders may be driven by hope/faith, an outflow of spirituality, resulting in a sense of calling and meaning (Sendjaya et al.). Therefore, the combined spirituality-servant leadership construct proposes a positive relationship between the leader’s spiritual beliefs (i.e., independent variable), a leader’s servant leadership behaviors (i.e., mediating variable), a leader’s spiritual practices (i.e., moderating variable), and a leader’s effectiveness as perceived by their followers (i.e., dependent variable; see Figure 1).

The construct is a combination of a generalized adaptation of the literature’s servant leadership frameworks (e.g., Patterson, 2003; Russell & Stone, 2002; Wong & Page, 2003) and spirituality constructs (e.g., Fry, 2003; Kriger & Seng, 2005), and includes spiritual beliefs and practices (hope/faith and works) as variables. In this adaptation, spiritual beliefs (hope and faith in God) are causal factors in the formation of values (integrity, character-orientation, and agapao love), which leads to servant leadership behaviors (e.g., respecting, treating fairly, listening to, appreciating, caring for, loving, and submitting to others). The importance of spiritual beliefs to the formation of values and behaviors in the spirituality-servant leadership construct is supported conceptually by Fry’s sense of calling to serve a higher purpose, Kriger and Seng’s (2005) ―?‖ or God variable, and Patterson’s assertion that servant leadership is spiritual in nature.



Leader’s SpiritualBeliefs

(Independent Variable)

Leader’s ServantLeadership Behaviors

(Mediating Variable)

Leader’s Effectiveness as perceived by

Follower(Dependent Variable)

Leader’s SpiritualPractices

(Moderating Variable)

Figure 1: A combined spirituality-servant leadership construct

Moreover, the spiritual practices of the servant leader (e.g., praying, meditating, and reading scripture) moderate the leader’s effectiveness, as perceived by followers. According to Neal (2000), practicing spirituality is taking time for individual self-examination and communicating with God through prayer, meditation, spiritual reading, and journaling. Reave (2005) conducted an exhaustive literature review on the effects of spirituality, particularly spiritual practices, on leadership effectiveness. According to Reave, higher levels of spiritual practice activity result in higher leader motivation, strengthen leader-follower relationships, increase leader resilience, and improve group performance.

Research shows that a leader’s increased engagement in specific spiritual practices, such as prayer and meditation, leads to greater leader motivation (Alexander, Rainforth, & Gelderloos, 1991), strengthens leader relationships (Anderson et al., 1999), improves leader resilience (Quick, Gavin, Cooper, Quick, & Gilbert, 2000), and increases leadership effectiveness (McCollum, 1999). In empirical studies, spiritual practices have created quantifiable improvements in the leader’s performance measures (Alexander et al., 1991; Anderson et al., 1999) and organizational productivity (Alexander et al., 1993).

According to Sendjaya and Pekerti (2010), spirituality is a major construct of servant leadership and consists of four elements: clarity of purpose, sense of wholeness, interconnectedness, and religiousness. The last element, religiousness, is ―a system of organized beliefs and worship which a person practices‖ (Enblem, 1992, as cited in Reave, 2005, p. 45) and includes spiritual practices such as prayer and meditation. These practices can engender followers’ trust in their leader as followers perceive that the leader is concerned for their well-being (Sendjaya & Pekerti). Outward focused prayer and meditation can result in a follower’s conscious awareness that their leader is concerned about their needs and desires, which in turn leads to the followers’ increased faith and trust in their leader. According to Joseph and Winston (2005), a leader’s concern for others that places the followers’ self-interests as priorities is a central element of servant leadership and elicits trust from the followers for the leaders. Higher levels of concern for others can result from leaders’ prayers for others and are



encouraged by scripture’s commands to love and serve others. Higher levels of concern for others result in higher levels of trust, a universally positively endorsed leadership attribute (Den Hartog et al., 1999), which in turn leads to increased followers’ perceptions of the leader’s effectiveness.

A review and analysis of the literature suggests three propositions related to the spirituality-servant leadership construct: (a) a leader’s spiritual beliefs foster the development of certain behaviors associated with servant leadership; (b) servant leaders are effective, as perceived by their followers; and (c) a leader’s spiritual practices moderate the perceived effectiveness of servant leaders.

Measurements and Testing

Three instruments will be used to measure the hypothesized relationships between spirituality, servant leadership, and leadership effectiveness. Two subsets of Fetzer’s (1999) BMMRS (see Appendix A), Liden et al.’s (2008) 28-item instrument (see Appendix B), and Denison et al.’s (1995) 21-item questionnaire (see Appendix C) will be used to measure spiritual beliefs, spiritual practices, servant leadership, and leadership effectiveness, respectively.

To test the propositions, data obtained from the survey instruments will be summarized and analyzed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) software. Descriptive statistics for all variables will be calculated. Furthermore, to test the relationship between each of the variables, separate Pearson’s product moment coefficients of correlation, a dimensionless index and estimation of the ratio of the covariance of two variables to the product of their standard deviations (Rodgers & Nicewander, 1988), will be calculated. The Pearson coefficient is a measure of relation, has a range between +1 and −1, and is used to measure the strength of linear dependence between two variables. If a positive and statistically significant relationship is found (i.e., r-value is positive and p-value is less than 0.05), then the hypotheses will be supported.

Conclusion

In creating a model of effective leadership, this paper proposes the dimensions of spiritual beliefs (i.e., hope and faith in God) and spiritual practices (i.e., praying, meditating, and reading scripture), which could be studied as mediating and moderating variables, respectively, in a combined spirituality-servant leadership construct. Examining the empirical relationships between spirituality and servant leadership can give scholars valuable insight into leadership issues relevant to today’s business leaders.



About the Author

GT Freeman earned a Bachelor of Science in Mechanical Engineering at North Carolina State University, an MBA at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and is currently pursuing a Ph.D. in Organizational Leadership at Regent University’s School of Global Leadership & Entrepreneurship. GT is an adjunct professor at Montreat College and a financial services executive responsible for organizational and operational effectiveness at a Fortune 500 insurance and retirement services firm.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to GT Freeman [Email: [email protected]].

References

Alexander, C. N., Rainforth, M. V., & Gelderloos, P. (1991). Transcendental meditation, self-actualization, and psychological health: A conceptual overview and statistical meta-analysis. Journal of Behavior & Personality, 6(5), 189-248.

Alexander, C. N., Swanson, G. C., Rainforth, M. V., & Carlisle, T. W. (1993). Effects of the Transcendental Meditation program on stress reduction, health, and employee development: A prospective study in two occupational settings. Anxiety, Stress, and Coping: An International Journal, 6, 245-262.

Anderson, V. L., Levinson, E. M., Barker, W., & Kiewra, K. R. (1999). The effects of meditation on teacher-perceived occupational stress, state and trait anxiety, and burnout. School Psychology Quarterly, 14(1), 3-18.

Banutu-Gomez, M. B. (2004). Great leaders teach exemplary followership and serve as servant leaders. The Journal of the American Academy of Business, 4(1), 143-152.

Bennett, J. L. (2001). Trainers as leaders of learning. Training & Development, 55(3), 43-45.

Bowie, N. (2000). A Kantian theory of leadership. The Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 21(4), 185-193.

Choi, Y., & Mai-Dalton, R. R. (1998). On the leadership function of self-sacrifice. The Leadership Quarterly, 9(4), 475-501.

Delbecq, A. L. (1999). Christian spirituality and contemporary business leadership. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 12(4), 349.

Den Hartog, D. N., House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Ruiz-Quintanilla, S. A., Dorfman, P. W., et al. (1999). Culture specific and cross-culturally generalizable implicit leadership



theories: Are attributes of charismatic/transformational leadership universally endorsed? The Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 219–256.

Denison, D. R., Hooijberg, R., & Quinn, R. E. (1995). Paradox and performance: Toward a theory of behavior complexity in managerial leadership. Organization Science, 6(5), 524-540.

Dennis, R. S., & Bocarnea, M. (2005). Development of a servant leadership assessment instrument. The Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 26(8), 600-615.

Dennis, R. S., & Winston, B. E. (2003). A factor analysis of Page and Wong’s servant leadership instrument. The Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 24(8), 455-459.

Dent, E. B., Higgins, M. E., & Wharff, D. M. (2005). Spirituality and leadership: An empirical review of definitions, distinctions, and embedded assumptions. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(5), 625-653.

Errol, E. J., & Winston, B. E. (2005). A correlation of servant leadership, leader trust, and organizational trust. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 26(1), 6-22.

Farling, M. L., Stone, A. G., & Winston, B. E. (1999). Servant leadership: Setting the stage for empirical research. Journal of Leadership Studies, 6(1/2), 49-72.

Fetzer Institute (1999). Multidimensional measurement of religiousness/ spirituality. Retrieved November 26, 2010 from http://www.fetzer.org/images/stories/pdf/MultidimensionalBooklet.pdf

Fry, L. W. (2003). Toward a theory of spiritual leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 14(6), 693-727.

Fry, L. W. (2005). Introduction to The Leadership Quarterly special issue: Toward a paradigm of spiritual leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(5), 619-622.

Greenleaf, R. K. (1977). Servant leadership: A journey into the nature of legitimate power & greatness (25th Anniversary Ed.). Mahway, NJ: Paulist Press.

Hart, S. L., & Quinn, R. E. (1993). Roles executives play: CEO's, behavioral complexity, and firm performance. Human Relations, 46(5), 543-574.

Irving, J. A. (August, 2004). Servant leadership and the effectiveness of teams: Findings and implications. Servant Leadership Research Roundtable Proceedings. Retrieved November 26, 2010 from http://www.regent.edu/acad/global/publications/sl_proceedings/home.shtml



Joseph, E. E., & Winston, B. E. (2005). A correlation of servant leadership, leader trust, and organizational trust. The Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 26(1/2), 6-22.

Koenig, H. G. (2008). Concerns about measuring spirituality in research. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 196(5), 349-355.

Kriger, M. P., & Hanson, B. J. (1999). A value-based paradigm for creating truly healthy organizations. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 12(4), 302-317.

Kriger, M. P., & Seng, Y. (2005). Leadership with inner meaning: A contingency theory of leadership based on the worldviews of five religions. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(5), 771-806.

Laub, J. (2003, August). From paternalism to the servant organization: Expanding the Organizational Leadership Assessment (OLA) model. Servant Leadership Research Roundtable Proceedings. Retrieved November 26, 2010 from http://www.regent.edu/acad/global/publications/sl_proceedings/home.shtml

Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., Zhao, H., & Henderson, D. (2008). Servant leadership: Development of a multidimensional measure and multi-level assessment. The Leadership Quarterly, 19(2), 161-177.

Lloyd, B. (1996). A new approach to leadership. Leadership & Organizational Development Journal, 17(7), 29-31

Maciariello, J. (2003). Lessons in leadership and management from Nehemiah. Theology Today, 60(3), 397-407.

Markow, F., & Klenke, K. (2005). The effects of personal meaning and calling on organization commitment: An empirical investigation of spiritual leadership. The International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 13(1), 8-27.

Marquardt, M. J. (2000). Action learning and leadership. The Learning Organization, 7(5), 233-240.

McCollum, B. (1999). Leadership development and self-development: An empirical study. Career Development International, 4(3), 149-157.

Ndoria, J. (August, 2004). Servant leadership: Academic jargon or lifestyle? Servant Leadership Research Roundtable Proceedings. Retrieved November 26, 2010 from http://www.regent.edu/acad/global/publications/sl_proceedings/home.shtml



Neal, J. A. (2000). Work as service to the divine: Giving our gifts selflessly and with joy. American Behavioral Scientist, 43(8), 1316-1333.

Northouse, P. G. (2010). Leadership: theory and practice (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Page, D., & Wong, P. T. P. (2000). A conceptual framework for measuring servant leadership. In S. Adjibolosoo (Ed.), The human factor in shaping the course of history and development. Boston, MA: University Press of America.

Paloutzian, R. F., Emmons, R. A., & Keortge, S. G. (2003). Spiritual well-being, spiritual intelligence, and healthy workplace policy. In R. A. Giacolone, & C. L. Jurkiewicz (Eds.), Handbook of workplace spirituality and organizational performance (pp. 123-137). New York, NY: M.E. Sharpe.

Parolini, J. L. (August, 2004). Effective servant leadership: A model incorporating servant leadership and the competing values framework. Servant Leadership Research Roundtable Proceedings. Retrieved November 26, 2010 from http://www.regent.edu/acad/global/publications/sl_proceedings/home.shtml

Patterson, K. (2003, August). Servant leadership: A theoretical model. Servant Leadership Research Roundtable Proceedings. Retrieved November 26, 2010 from http://www.regent.edu/acad/global/publications/sl_proceedings/home.shtml

Quick, J. C., Gavin, J. H., Cooper, C. L., Quick, J. D., & Gilbert, R. E. (2000). Executive health: Building strength, managing risks. The Academy of Management Executive, 14(2), 34-46.

Quinn, R. E., & Rohrbaugh, J. (1981). A competing values approach to organizational effectiveness. Public Productivity Review, 5(2), 122-140.

Quinn, R. E., & Rohrbaugh, J. (1983). A spatial model of effectiveness criteria: Towards a competing values approach to organizational analysis. Management Science, 29(3), 363-367.

Reave, L. (2005). Spiritual values and practices related to leadership effectiveness. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(5), 655-687.

Rippentrop, A. E., Altmaier, E. M., Chen, J. J., Found, E. M., & Keffala, V. J. (2005). The relationship between religion/spirituality and physical health, mental health, and pain in a chronic pain population. Pain, 116(3), 311-321.

Rodgers, J. L., & Nicewander, W. A. (1988). Thirteen ways to look at the correlation coefficient. The American Statistician, 42(1), 59-66.



Rowe, R. (2003). Leaders as servants. New Zealand Management, 50(1), 24-26.

Russell, R. F. (2001). The role of values in servant leadership. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 22(2), 76-85.

Russell, R. F., & Stone, A. G. (2002). A review of servant leadership attributes: Developing a practical model. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 23(3), 145-157.

Sendjaya, S. (2003, August). Development and validation of servant leadership behavior scale. Servant Leadership Research Roundtable Proceedings. Retrieved November 26, 2010 from http://www.regent.edu/acad/global/publications/sl_proceedings/home.shtml

Sendjaya, S., & Pekerti, A. (2010). Servant leadership as antecedent of trust in organizations. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 31(7), 643-663.

Sendjaya, S., Sarros, J. C., & Santora, J. C. (2008). Defining and measuring servant leadership behavior in organizations. Journal of Management Studies, 45(2), 402-424.

Stone, A. G., Russell, R. F., & Patterson, K. (2003, August). Transformational versus servant leadership: A difference in leader focus. Servant Leadership Research Roundtable Proceedings. Retrieved November 26, 2010 from http://www.regent.edu/acad/global/publications/sl_proceedings/home.shtml

Whetstone, J. T. (2002). Personalism and moral leadership: the servant leader with a transforming vision. Business Ethics: A European Review, 11(4), 385-392.

Wilson, R. T. (1998). Servant leadership. The Physician Executive, 24(5), 6-13.

Winston, B. E. (2003, August). Extending Patterson’s servant leadership model: Explaining how leaders and followers interact in a circular model. Servant Leadership Research Roundtable Proceedings. Retrieved November 26, 2010 from http://www.regent.edu/acad/global/publications/sl_proceedings/home.shtml

Wong, P. T. P. (2003). An opponent-process model of servant leadership and a typology of leadership styles. Retrieved November 26, 2010 from http://twu.ca/academics/graduate/leadership/servant-leadership/servant-leadership-roundtable-typology.pdf

Wong, P. T. P., & Page, D. (2003, August). Servant leadership: An opponent-process model and the revised servant leadership profile. Servant Leadership Research



Roundtable Proceedings. Retrieved November 26, 2010 from http://www.regent.edu/acad/global/publications/sl_proceedings/home.shtml

Wresniewski, A., McCauley, C., Rozin, P., & Schwartz, B. (1997). Jobs, careers, and callings: People’s relations to their work. Journal of Research in Personality, 31(1), 21–33.

Yukl, G. (2010). Leadership in organizations (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.



Appendix A

Subset of Fetzer’s (1999) Brief Multidimensional Measure of Religiousness/Spirituality

Spiritual Beliefs

1. I believe in a God who watches over me.

2. I feel a deep sense of responsibility for reducing pain and suffering in the world.

Spiritual Experiences

3. I feel God’s presence

4. I find strength and comfort in my religion.

5. I feel deep inner peace or harmony.

6. I desire to be closer to or in union with God.

7. I feel God’s love for me, directly or through others.

8. I am spiritually touched by the beauty of creation.

Spiritual Coping

9. I think about how my life is part of a larger spiritual force.

10. I work together with God as partners.

11. I look to God for strength, support, and guidance.

12. I feel God is punishing me for my sins or lack of spirituality.

13. I wonder whether God has abandoned me.

14. I try to make sense of the situation and decide what to do without relying on God.

15. To what extent is your religion involved in dealing with stressful situations in any way.

Spiritual Practices

16. How often do you pray privately in places other than at a church or synagogue?

17. Within your religious or spiritual tradition, how often do you meditate?

18. How often do you watch or listen to religious programs on TV or radio?

19. How often do you read the Bible or other religious literature?

20. How often are prayers or grace said before or after meals in your home?

Overall Self-Ranking

21. To what extent do you consider yourself a religious person?

22. To what extent do you consider yourself a spiritual person?



Appendix B

Liden et al.’s (2008) Servant Leadership Scale

1. I would seek help from my manager if I had a personal problem.

2. My manager cares about my personal well-being.

3. My manager takes time to talk to me on a personal level.

4. My manager can recognize when I’m down without asking me.

5. My manager emphasizes the importance of giving back to the community.

6. My manager is always interested in helping people in our community.

7. My manager is involved in community activities.

8. I am encouraged by my manager to volunteer in the community.

9. My manager can tell if something is going wrong.

10. My manager is able to effectively think through complex problems.

11. My manager has a thorough understanding of our organization and its goals.

12. My manager can solve work problems with new or creative ideas.

13. My manager gives me the responsibility to make important decisions about my job.

14. My manager encourages me to handle important work decisions on my own.

15. My manager gives me the freedom to handle difficult situations in the way that I feel is

best.

16. When I have to make an important decision at work, I do not have to consult my manager

first.

17. My manager makes my career development a priority.

18. My manager is interested in making sure that I achieve my career goals.

19. My manager provides me with work experiences that enable me to develop new skills.

20. My manager wants to know about my career goals.

21. My manager seems to care more about my success than his/her own.

22. My manager puts my best interests ahead of his/her own.

23. My manager sacrifices his/her own interests to meet my needs.

24. My manager does what she/he can do to make my job easier.

25. My manager holds high ethical standards.

26. My manager is always honest.

27. My manager would not compromise ethical principles in order to achieve success.

28. My manager values honest more than profits.



Appendix C

Modified Denison et al.’s (1995) Leadership Effectiveness Survey

To what extent does the leader…

1. Come up with inventive ideas

2. Experiment with new concepts and ideas

3. Exert influence in the industry

4. Develop and maintain a network of external contacts

5. See that the company delivers on stated goals

6. Get the company to meet expected goals

7. Make the company's role very clear

8. Clarify the company's priorities and directions

9. Anticipate workflow problems, avoids crisis

10. Bring a sense of order into the company

11. Maintain tight logistical control

12. Compare records, reports, and so on to detect discrepancies

13. Surface key differences among team members, then works collaboratively to resolve

them

14. Encourage participative decision making in the team

15. Show empathy and concern in dealing with direct reports

16. Treat each individual in a sensitive, caring way

For Questions 17-18: To what extent does the leader…

For Questions 19-21: To what extent is the leader…

17. Meet performance standards

18. Compare favorably to peers in the industry

19. A role model

20. Successful overall

21. Effective overall


The Relationship between GLOBE’s Future Orientation Cultural Dimension and Servant Leadership Endorsement

Shane Sokoll Regent University

Understanding cultural nuances, practices, and dimensions in today’s ever globalizing world is a key competency for today’s organizational leaders and those of the future. In an attempt to build upon the knowledge already presented the literature regarding cross-cultural interaction and multicultural leadership competencies, this model paper explores the cultural dimension termed future orientation that is used in the Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness (GLOBE) project and its relationship to and effect on followers’ reception of servant leadership behaviors. Future orientation is defined by House et al. (1999) as “the degree to which individuals in organizations or societies engage in future-oriented behaviors such as planning, investing in the future, and delaying gratification.” The distinctive, central focus and base of servant leadership behaviors, as explained by Liden, Wayne, Zhao, and Henderson (2008) and Fields and Winston (2010), is serving the needs of followers. Based on a comparison of the conceptual theories and empirical findings from the GLOBE study and the literature on servant leadership, this model paper makes two hypotheses: a) employees from cultures that value high future orientation will highly value servant leadership behaviors exhibited by leaders; and b) employees from cultures that hold a lesser value of future orientation will value servant leadership behaviors exhibited by leaders less than employees from cultures with a high future orientation.

The leaders of yesterday look vastly different from the leaders of the future. As humanity finds itself in the midst of a globalizing world going through hyper-speed changes on numerous fronts, organizations from scores of nations are racing to identify leadership approaches and wisdom that can meet the challenges of today and tomorrow (Holbeche, 2009; Maak & Pless, 2006). Jack Welch, the former CEO of General Electric (GE), delivered a speech to his employees where he described this daunting world scene and the call for a new type of leader, in which he stated,

The Jack Welch of the future cannot be me. I spent my entire career in the United States. The next head of General Electric will be somebody who spent time in Bombay, in Hong Kong, in Buenos Aires. We have to send

GLOBE’s Future Orientation Cultural Dimension and Servant Leadership Endorsement P a g e | 142


our best and brightest overseas and make sure they have the training that will allow them to be the global leaders who will make GE flourish in the future. (as cited in Javidan & House, 2001)

Global leadership competencies are in increasing demand. Navigating multinational, multicultural working relationships requires a new set of KSAOs (knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics—i.e., competencies) that are vast in number and complex in depth. In an attempt to add to the literature regarding multicultural leadership competencies, this model paper presents an exploration of the cultural variations in the concepts future orientation and servant leadership theory.

The cultural dimension termed ”future orientation,” defined by House et al. (1999) and adapted by Ashkanasy, Gupta, Mayfield, and Trevor-Roberts (2004) in the Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness (GLOBE) project, refers to “the extent to which members of a society or an organization believe that their current actions will influence their future, focus on investment in their future, believe that they will have a future that matters, believe in planning for developing their future, and look far into the future for assessing the effects of their current actions” (Ashkanasy et al., p. 285). Scholarly research has found a positive and negative relationship between high and low future orientation and leadership behaviors such as strategic planning, entrepreneurship, decision making, corruption, visioning, social responsibility, performance, development, and support of subordinates, as well as a relationship with human resource management practices such as recruitment, interviewing, selection, training and development, compensation and rewards, retention strategies, and organizational communication (Alavi & McCormick, 2004; Catana & Catana, 2010; Dastmalchian, Javidan, & Alam, 2001; Frank, Kessler, & Fink, 2010; Grisham, 2009; Hytter, 2007; Ofer, 2008; Papalexandris & Panayotopoulou, 2004; Roxas, Lindsay, Ashill, & Victorio, 2008; Sarros, Gray, Densten, & Cooper, 2005; Seleim & Bontis, 2009; Yeganeh & Su, 2007, 2008; Zhao, 2006). This model paper proposes the research of yet another leadership variable relationship with the concept of future orientation: servant leadership theory.

Culturally Endorsed Implicit Leadership Theory

Implicit leadership theory (ILT) describes how individuals form and hold opinions about what types of actions, attributes, personalities, characteristics, knowledge, abilities, and skills are needed to achieve exceptional leadership (Dorfman, Hanges, & Brodbeck, 2004). According to Lord and Maher (1991), an individual’s opinions about effective leadership affect how the individual, as a follower, responds to and accepts others as leaders. Dorfman et al. (2004) extended ILT to the cultural level and labeled it culturally endorsed implicit leadership theory (CLT) based upon the concept that the belief system held by individuals is often shared with those of common cultures. The GLOBE study found that the type of leadership styles believed to be effective by individuals in



organizations has a positive relationship with the level that the organization and society as a whole value future orientation (Dorfman et al.). For example, when organizations were seen as valuing future orientation, the CLT embraced at the organizational level would probably be made up of the type of leadership styles that the GLOBE study described as “Participative, Humane-Oriented, Team-Oriented, and Charismatic/Value-Based” (Dorfman et al., p. 331). The comprehensive list of leadership attributes that correspond with these CLT dimensions are: delegator, non-micromanager, egalitarian, other oriented, non-autocratic, non-dictatorial, not bossy, non-elitist, modest, self-effacing, patient, generous, compassionate, group-oriented, collaborative, loyal, consultative, communicative, team builder, informed, integrator, diplomatic, worldly, win-win problem solver, effective bargainer, non-hostile, honest, non-vindictive, non-irritable, orderly, administratively skilled, organized, good administrator, foresight, prepared, anticipatory, plans ahead, enthusiastic, positive, morale booster, motive arouser, risk taker, self-sacrificial, convincing, sincere, just, trustworthy, willful, decisive, logical, intuitive, improvement-oriented, excellence oriented, and performance oriented. The correlations found between high levels of organizational future orientation and the CLTs from the GLOBE study provide an example of the insights that can be gleaned about how future orientation affects individuals’ potential perceptions about certain types of leadership behaviors. Exploring how the level of societal and organizational future orientation might affect the reception of other types of leadership behaviors beyond those researched in the GLOBE study might prove worthwhile. For example, how would the level of societal and organizational future orientation affect the perception of the effectiveness of servant leadership behaviors?

Servant Leadership Theory

Servant leadership theory has had multiple dimensions and constructs proposed and studied by researchers over the years. Russell and Stone (2002) found in the literature the following 20 servant leadership attributes: vision, honesty, integrity, service, trust, modeling, pioneering, appreciation of others, empowerment, communication, credibility, competence, stewardship, visibility, influence, persuasion, listening, encouragement, teaching, and delegation (p. 147). Beyond these attributes, Fields and Winston (2010) identified 25 more servant leadership attributes that have been attempted to be measured with instruments: humility, servant-hood, caring for others, developing others, goal-setting, team-building, shared decision making, voluntary subordination, authentic self, covenantal relationship, responsible morality, transcendent spirituality, transforming influence, forming relationships with subordinates, helping subordinates grow and succeed, behaving ethically, conceptual skills, putting subordinates first, creating value for those outside the organization, leader’s agapao love, altruism, wisdom, persuasion mapping, emotional healing, creating value for the community (p. 22). Table 1 (parts 1 and 2) shows the 20 servant



leadership attributes identified in the literature by Russell and Stone, the 25 additional leadership attributes identified in the literature by Fields and Winston, and the CLT attributes that correspond with a high level of organizational future orientation described by Dorfman et al. (2004) in the GLOBE study.

Servant Leadership Validated

Liden, Wayne, Zhao, and Henderson (2008) empirically researched the servant leadership construct in an attempt to validate the distinctiveness of servant leadership from other leadership approaches and their effectiveness. As Liden et al. (2008) pointed out, Greenleaf (1977), who coined the term servant leadership and introduced the leadership style in an articulated manner, did not continue down the path of formal theory design and research to validate the attributes and results of servant leadership behaviors. The Liden et al. study included two phases: a pilot study with a sample of 298 university students from a single university, and a follow up organizational study with 164 employees and 25 supervisors from a single production and distribution company (p. 165). Liden et al.’s research resulted with empirical validation of seven servant leadership dimensions (conceptual skills, empowering, helping subordinates grow and succeed, putting subordinates first, behaving ethically, emotional healing, and creating value for the community); thus, making it a landmark study in the development and exploration of the construct.

Servant Leadership Simplified and Validated Again

One of the primary aims of Fields and Winston’s (2010) research was to simplify the servant leadership construct and to design and test a simplified measurement tool to assess the servant leadership approach. The 45 attributes of servant leadership itemized in Table 1 (parts 1 and 2) show the complexity of the servant leadership construct that has developed as researchers have sought to explore this leadership phenomenon. As can also be seen in Table 1 (parts 1 and 2), some dimensions of servant leadership have overlapped with other leadership theories, which often confuses the servant leadership construct’s distinctiveness. Fields and Winston, with the assistance of a panel of experts on servant leadership theory, formed a single-dimension, ten-item measurement tool. Table 2 presents Fields and Winston’s single-dimensioned servant leadership behaviors and the ten-item instrument. The single dimension tool seeks to measure the distinctive behaviors of servant leadership that focus on the leader’s service to and development of followers. The instrument was successful in empirically testing the servant leadership distinctive through a sample of 456 employees across multiple industries (Fields & Winston).



Table 1 (part 1 of 2): GLOBE's Leadership Attributes Favored by High Level Future Orientation Organizations & SL GLOBE Russell & Stone's Lit. Review Fields & Winston's Lit. Review administratively skilled appreciation of others altruism anticipatory

communication authentic self collaborative competence behaving ethically communicative credibility caring for others compassionate delegation conceptual skills consultative empowerment covenantal relationship convincing encouragement creating value for the community decisive honesty creating value for those outside the organization delegator influence developing others diplomatic integrity emotional healing effective bargainer listening forming relationships with subordinates egalitarian modeling goal-setting enthusiastic persuasion helping subordinates grow and succeed excellence oriented pioneering humility foresight service leader’s agapao love generous stewardship persuasion mapping good administrator teaching putting subordinates first group-oriented trust responsible morality honest visibility servant-hood improvement-oriented vision shared decision making informed team-building integrator transcendent spirituality intuitive transforming influence just voluntary subordination logical wisdom



Table 1 (part 2 of 2): GLOBE's Leadership Attributes Favored by High Level Future Orientation Organizations & SL GLOBE (continued) Russell & Stone's Lit. Review Fields & Winston's Lit. Review loyal appreciation of others altruism modest communication authentic self morale booster competence behaving ethically motive arouser

credibility caring for others non-autocratic delegation conceptual skills non-dictatorial empowerment covenantal relationship non-elitist encouragement creating value for the community non-hostile honesty creating value for those outside the organization non-irritable influence developing others non-micromanager integrity emotional healing non-vindictive listening forming relationships with subordinates not bossy modeling goal-setting orderly persuasion helping subordinates grow and succeed organized pioneering humility other oriented service leader’s agapao love patient stewardship persuasion mapping performance oriented teaching putting subordinates first plans ahead trust responsible morality positive visibility servant-hood prepared vision shared decision making risk taker

team-building self-effacing transcendent spirituality self-sacrificial transforming influence sincere voluntary subordination team builder wisdom trustworthy willful



win-win problem solver worldly



Table 2: Fields and Winston’s New Parsimonious Measure of Servant Leadership Behaviors

Practices what he/she preaches

Serves people without regard to their nationality, gender, or race

Sees serving as a mission of responsibility to others

Genuinely interested in employees as people

Understands that serving others is most important

Willing to make sacrifices to help others

Seeks to instill trust rather than fear or insecurity

Is always honest

Is driven by a sense of higher calling

Promotes values that transcend self-interest and material success

Response scale for extent to which this statement described the behavior of a focal leader: 1 = definitely no; 2 = no; 3 = neutral; 4 = yes; 5 = definitely yes Items comprising a new parsimonious measure of servant leadership behaviors (Chronbach alpha = .96)

Future Orientation and Servant Leadership Model

The GLOBE study found a tendency of organizations with a culture of high future orientation to be inclined to embrace certain types of leadership: Participative, Humane-Oriented, Team-Oriented, and Charismatic/Value-Based (Dorfman et al., 2004). As can be seen in Table 1 (parts 1 and 2), certain attributes of these leadership styles are similar or overlap with servant leadership attributes as described in the literature. Distinctively, the central focus and base of servant leadership behaviors, as explained by Liden et al. (2008) and Fields and Winston (2010), is serving the needs of followers. GLOBE’s leadership attribute labeled “other oriented” corresponds with this distinctive servant leadership attribute. Table 1 (part two) shows the alignment between GLOBE’s “other oriented” attribute and multiple variations of the attribute that have been explored in servant leadership research. As GLOBE found leadership attributes that would be preferred by followers in high future oriented cultures, many of which have been explored as part of the servant leadership construct (including its distinctive attribute), this model paper proposes that more exhaustive exploration of servant leadership and how it relates to cultural future orientation will confirm that the level of cultural future orientation affects the preference of followers for servant leadership behaviors.

Multiple aspects of serving the needs of followers require servant leaders to take a futuristic approach in their interactions with followers. Greenleaf (1977) elucidated that servant leaders seek to help employees develop to their fullest potential, which includes future leadership capabilities. Similarly, Liden et al. (2008) stated, “Servant leadership differs from traditional approaches to leadership in that it stresses personal integrity and focuses on forming strong long-term relationships with employees” (p. 162). Is it not probable that followers from cultures with higher levels of future orientation, where



long-term career planning and individual professional development are important and valued, would have a tendency to positively embrace and respond to servant leader behavior that is focused in part on developing followers for long-term professional success?

Several studies around the topic of GLOBE’s future orientation dimension and leadership and organizational practices attest to the high value that individuals from high future orientation cultures place upon long-term career planning, training, development and future professional success. Zhao’s (2006) study found that international recruiters underestimated the amount of value applicants from high future orientation cultures place on long-term intrinsic rewards, such as training and development opportunities. Zhao explains that such learning opportunities better prepare and ensure applicants for long-term professional success and suggests that recruiters craft job advertisements that clearly explain long-term learning opportunities available so that the best candidates will be attracted and apply for employment at the companies they represent. Ofer (2008) conducted research in Japanese organizations and found that due to its high future orientation, a unique critical success top management support process is investing in project management training. Ofer explained that this is important because most project managers in Japan have a strong technical background, but little training in general management or project management. Ofer pointed out that Japanese project managers often make decisions with consideration of what will support them in the long term; therefore, in order to ensure success in the future, they seek training support. Based on findings from studies such as Zhao’s and Ofer’s, together with the alignment of servant leadership behaviors focused on serving the needs of followers, such as helping followers to develop for ensured, long-term success, this model paper proposes that the potential positive response by followers from high future orientation cultures to servant leadership behaviors is probable and therefore worth the time and effort to investigate the potential relationship and results through further research.

Instruments to Measure the Future Orientation-Servant Leadership Model

Now that a simplified, distinctive servant leadership tool has been designed and empirically confirmed (Fields & Winston, 2010), pursuing a more comprehensive, empirical understanding of the relationship between the cultural phenomena of future orientation and servant leadership is more attainable. This paper proposes the use of Fields and Winston’s tool over that of Liden et al. (2008) due to its parsimonious, single dimension approach and shown psychometric validity. In order to succinctly determine if employees in organizations that value high future orientation have a tendency to positively embrace servant leadership behaviors, this paper proposes that research be conducted utilizing GLOBE’s instrument to assess organizational future



orientation and a CLT altered version of Fields and Winston’s servant leadership instrument. As Fields (2007) pointed out, there are two approaches used to explore variables that may influence how followers perceive leaders: ratings of specific leaders provided by followers, and followers’ general, preconceived ideas of successful leadership. Fields and Winston’s servant leadership instrument was originally tested based on the first approach, asking followers to rate specific behaviors of their leaders. In this model, it is proposed that Fields and Winston’s servant leadership instrument be altered to follow the format of GLOBE’s CLT questions in order to test followers’ implicit leadership theories regarding the servant leadership behaviors measured in Fields and Winston’s instrument.

Hypotheses of the Future Orientation-Servant Leadership Model

The following hypotheses are made in conjunction with the proposed model that explores the relationship between the independent variable of cultural future orientation and the dependent variable of followers’ CLT regarding servant leadership behaviors:

Hypothesis 1: Employees from cultures that value high future orientation will highly value servant leadership behaviors exhibited by leaders.

Hypothesis 2: Employees from cultures that hold a lesser value of future orientation will value servant leadership behaviors exhibited by leaders less than employees from cultures with a high future orientation.

Both hypotheses essentially propose that there is a positive relationship between the level of a culture’s future orientation and the value placed on servant leadership behaviors within the culture.

Conclusion: Benefits of Researching the Future Orientation-Servant Leadership Model

Several benefits exist for globalizing organizations and their leaders regarding possible findings from using the proposed model to test the two proposed hypotheses. First, the results will provide information that can be used by leaders to determine if practice of servant leadership behaviors should be considered. Second, the results will provide information to assist in determining if practice of servant leadership behaviors would have a more positive effect upon followers from high future orientation cultures than followers from low future orientation cultures. Likewise, benefits to academic researchers will be gained from investigation of the proposed model. Along with adding to a fuller understanding of the construct of future orientation and the construct of servant leadership, the findings from the proposed research have the potential to offer new understanding of how the future orientation concept affects the endorsement



of servant leadership by followers. Second, the servant leadership construct that recently gained empirical validation through Fields and Winston’s (2010) study and the SL instrument will be retested with a sample representing at least one additional culture beyond that of the United States, thus examining the effects culture plays in regard to the servant leadership construct. Research of the proposed model is expected to play a small, yet important role in the search to understand how to lead and collaborate across cultures.

About the Author

Shane Sokoll is a student in the School of Global Leadership & Entrepreneurship at Regent University.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Shane Sokoll [Email: [email protected]].

References

Alavi, S. B., & McCormick, J. (2004). A cross-cultural analysis of the effectiveness of the Learning Organization model in school contexts. The International Journal of Educational Management, 18(6/7), 408. doi: 10.1108/09513540410563112

Ashkanasy, N., Gupta, V., Mayfield, M., & Trevor-Roberts, E. (2004). Future orientation. In R. House, P. Hanges, M. Javidan, P. Dorfman & W. Gupta (Eds.), Culture, leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies (pp. 282-342). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Catana, G., & Catana, D. (2010). Organisational culture dimensions in Romanian finance industry. Journal for East European Management Studies, 15(2), 128.

Dastmalchian, A., Javidan, M., & Alam, K. (2001). Effective leadership and culture in Iran: An empirical study. Applied Psychology, 50(4), 532-558. doi: 10.1111/1464-0597.00072

Dorfman, P. W., Hanges, P. J., & Brodbeck, F. C. (2004). Leadership and cultural variation. In R. House, P. Hanges, M. Javidan, P. Dorfman & W. Gupta (Eds.), Culture, Leadership, and Organizations: The GLOBE Study of 62 Societies (pp. 779-719). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Fields, D. L. (2007). Determinants of follower perceptions of a leader's authenticity and integrity. European Management Journal, 25(3), 195-206. doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.emj.2007.04.005



Fields, D. L., & Winston, B. E. (2010). Development and evaluation of a new parsimonious measure of servant leadership. School of Global Leadership & Entrepreneurship. Regent University. Virginia Beach, VA.

Frank, H., Kessler, A., & Fink, M. (2010). Entrepreneurial orientation and business performance - a replication study. Schmalenbach Business Review, 62, 175.

Greenleaf, R. K. (1977). Servant leadership. New York: Paulist Press.

Grisham, T. (2009). The Delphi technique: A method for testing complex and multifaceted topics. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 2(1), 112-130. doi: 10.1108/17538370910930545

Holbeche, L. (2009). Global HRM aligning human resources and business strategy (2nd ed.) (pp. 381-404). Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.

House, R., Hanges, P., Ruiz-Quintanilla, S., Dorfman, P., Javidan, M., Dickson, M., & Gupta, V. (1999). Cultural influences on leadership and organizations: Project GLOBE. Advances in Global Leadership, 1, 171-233.

Hytter, A. (2007). Retention strategies in France and Sweden. Irish Journal of Management, 28(1), 59.

Javidan, M., & House, R. J. (2001). Cultural acumen for the global manager: Lessons from Project GLOBE. Organizational Dynamics, 29(4), 289-305. doi: 10.1016/S0090-2616(01)00034-1

Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., Zhao, H., & Henderson, D. (2008). Servant leadership: Development of a multidimensional measure and multi-level assessment. The Leadership Quarterly, 19(2), 161-177. doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2008.01.006

Lord, R., & Maher, K. (1991). Leadership and information processing: Linking perceptions and performance (Vol. 1). Cambridge, MA: Unwin Hyman.

Maak, T., & Pless, N. M. (2006). Responsible leadership in a stakeholder society - a relational perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 66(1), 99-115.

Ofer, Z. (2008). Top management involvement in project management: Exclusive support practices for different project scenarios. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 1(3), 387-403. doi: 10.1108/17538370810883837

Papalexandris, N., & Panayotopoulou, L. (2004). Exploring the mutual interaction of societal culture and human resource management practices: Evidence from 19 countries. Employee Relations, 26(5), 495-509. doi: 10.1108/01425450410550473



Roxas, H., Lindsay, V., Ashill, N., & Victorio, A. (2008). Institutional analysis of strategic choice of micro, small, and medium enterprises: Development of a conceptual framework. Singapore Management Review, 30(2), 47.

Russell, R. F., & Stone, G. A. (2002). A review of servant leadership attributes: Developing a practical model. [DOI: 10.1108/01437730210424]. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 23(3), 145-157.

Sarros, J. C., Gray, J., Densten, I. L., & Cooper, B. (2005). The organizational culture profile revisited and revised: An Australian perspective. Australian Journal of Management, 30(1), 159. doi: 10.1177/031289620503000109

Seleim, A., & Bontis, N. (2009). The relationship between culture and corruption: a cross-national study. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 10(1), 165-184. doi: 10.1108/14691930910922978

Yeganeh, H., & Su, Z. (2007). Comprehending core cultural orientations of Iranian managers. International Journal, 14(4), 336-353. doi: 10.1108/13527600710830359

Yeganeh, H., & Su, Z. (2008). An examination of human resource management practices in Iranian public sector. Personnel Review, 37(2), 203-221. doi: 10.1108/00483480810850542

Zhao, H. (2006). Expectations of recruiters and applicants in large cities of China. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21(5), 459-475. doi: 10.1108/02683940610673979

Ethical Dissonance and Response to Destructive Leadership: A Proposed Model

MaryJo Burchard Regent University

A new predictive model is proposed that attempts to illustrate the person-organization (PO) exchange cycles that occur in each of four distinct ethical PO fit scenarios: high organizational ethics, high individual ethics; low organizational ethics, low individual ethics; high organizational ethics, low individual ethics; and low organizational ethics, high individual ethics. Previous models that examine ethical decision making in the organization are examined, and the new causal model is described. Recommendations for testing the validity of the model include a combination of quantitative and qualitative measures. Limitations of the model and recommendations for further study are also discussed.

Considerations of person-organization fit may necessitate more than simple compatibility between a position and an individual’s education, experience, and skills. If the organization’s values and ethics are not compatible with the individual’s ethics, the likelihood of the person remaining in that organization significantly decreases (Sims & Kroeck, 1994; Coldwell, Billsberry, Meurs, & Marsh, 2008). The need for ethical fit extends far beyond the previously established interpretation of the psychological contract, which was either primarily transactional or relational (O’Donohue & Nelson, 2009). Schneider (1987) contended that employees choose to place themselves into and out of work situations, and are therefore often responsible for their work environment, because it is the result of the choices that people are making. Further, Schneider (1987) proposed that when an employee senses a person-organization lack of ethical fit, the employee will choose to leave the organization.

Coldwell, Billsberry, van Meurs, and Marsh (2008) developed an explanatory model of the effect of person-organization ethical fit upon the attraction and retention of employees. They explained, “Individual perceptions of ethical-organizational fit depend on individual’s perceptions of their company’s ethical orientation and CSR-derived corporate reputation” (p. 611). Variation in employee perception of ethical fit seems to initially stem from variation in levels of moral development (Kohlberg, 1981); however, variations can also increase or decrease with tenure, due to social influence within the organization (Brewer, 2007; Zyglidopoulos & Fleming, 2008; Coldwell et al. 2008; Ashford & Arand, 2003).

Ethical Dissonance and Response to Destructive Leadership: A Proposed Model P a g e | 155


Why would some employees choose to leave an environment in which they perceive a lack of PO fit (Schneider, 1987), while others choose to stay (Zyglidopoulos & Fleming, 2008)? The purpose of this paper is to examine the impact of ethical person-organization fit upon employees, and to propose a causal model that will attempt to explain why some who experience ethical dissonance, choose to “blow the whistle” or leave (Sims & Kroeck, 1994; Schneider, 1987; Coldwell et al. 2008), while others choose to stay and become socialized within the system (Padilla, Hogan, & Kaizer, 2008; Zyglidopoulos & Fleming, 2008).

Previous Research on Ethical Decision Making in Organizations

The majority of models that attempt to address ethical decision making illustrate judgment as the foundational step in a process that entails multiple decisions (Nguyen & Biderman, 2007; Dubensky & Loken, 1989; Jones, 1991; Trevino, 1986).

Rest’s (1986) work is foundational for contemporary research in the field. He proposed four steps in moral decision making. An individual must: (a) recognize that a moral dilemma exists, (b) make a choice based on moral judgment, (c) determine to deem moral concerns more imperative than other concerns, and (d) act upon the moral concerns. According to Rest (1986), success in one of the areas is not predictive of success in any of the other stages. For instance, one could be highly skilled in moral reasoning but lack resolve to act morally, or resolve to act morally but lack the moral reasoning necessary to deliberate and select the moral action. Rest (1979) also developed the Defining Issues Test (DIT) based on Kolberg’s moral development theories, which provided a more reliable method of measuring moral judgment than previous scales.

Jones (1991) developed an explanatory model that merged Rest’s (1986) four-step moral reasoning model with Fiske and Taylor’s (1984) work on social cognition to illustrate the ethical decision making process of an individual who was encountering such an ethical dilemma within the context of work. Jones’ (1991) model (in Figure 1) demonstrates that

“moral intensity will affect the recognition of moral issues through its impact on the individual’s recognition of the consequences of decisions…. Moral issues of high intensity will be more salient…because (a) [there is] greater magnitude of consequences, (b) their effects stand out, and (c) their effects involve significant others (greater social, cultural, psychological, or physical proximity)” (pp. 380-381).

Jones’ (1991) work challenged the assumption that individuals will “decide and behave in the same manner regardless of the nature of the moral issue involved” (p. 391).



Figure 1. Jones (1991) ethical decision making model.

Jones’ (1991) model illustrated the impact that moral intensity has upon ethical choices and behavior, and acknowledges that organizational factors influence the establishment of moral intent and behavior. However, the model fell short of reflecting the cyclical, ongoing dynamic exchange between the individual and the organization, which impacts the development and sustaining of one’s code of conduct in the organizational context. Jones and Hiltebeitel (1995) filled this gap when they conducted a study of organizational influence upon moral decisions, and proposed a model that demonstrated organizational influence upon the moral decision-making process. Like Jones (1991), Jones and Hiltebeitel (1995) based their study and proposed model upon Rest’s (1986) moral reasoning and Kohlberg’s (1976) cognitive moral development theory.



Figure 2. Jones and Hiltebeitel (1995) Formation and revision of an individual’s code of conduct.

Jones and Hiltebeitel’s (1995) model was unique because it illustrated two distinct choice-cycles that one could experience in relation to one’s personal code of ethics. When employees were called upon to do tasks in events that were considered “routine” (implying no internal conflict or cognitive dissonance), actions taken were almost automatic, and feedback followed to evaluate ethical fit. However, when an ethical issue was presented in an event that diverged from the routine, one referred to one’s personal code of conduct for ethical cues. In some cases, however, the individual’s code of conduct would be insufficient to help the individual make the necessary moral decision. In such a case, the individual would return to the formation stage of his or her code of conduct and consider all of the influencing factors that impacted his or her code of conduct, to resolve the conflict. Professional and organizational influences, as well as previous personal influences impact the formation (and at times, re-formation) of the individual’s code of ethics, and the influences that are the strongest are the ones that determine the re-formation of the individual’s code of conduct. The process that Jones and Hiltebeitel (1995) describe is reflective of Wieck’s (2005) sensemaking process within organizations, in which the members discuss confusing or unusual stimuli together, in order to formulate a shared perception of the issue and, consequently, a shared directional decision. Haslam’s (2004) self-identity theory proposes that one’s self-concept is not immutable, which is also compatible with Jones and Hiltebeitel’s (1995) study. While a wealth of research has been dedicated to the development of models based upon ethical decision making (Jones, 1991; Jones & Hiltebeitel, 1995; Trevino, 1986; Donaldson & Dunfee, 1994), social and psychological contracts



(O’Donohue & Nelson, 2009; Bunderson, 2001; Thompson & Hart, 2006; Gosling & Huang, 2009) , and moral development (Kohlberg, 1976; Rest, 1986; Wood & Bandura, 1989), little attention has contributed to the examination of the impact of ethical person-organizational fit upon the person-organization exchange, within each of the four potential fit options. Two options possess high person-organization fit (a) high organizational ethics, high individual ethics (High-High) (b) low organizational ethics, low individual ethics (Low-Low); and two possess low person-organization fit (c) high organizational ethics, low individual ethics and (High-Low) (d) low organizational ethics, high individual ethics (Low-High). The proposed Ethical Dissonance Cycle model attempts to fill this gap by demonstrating the cyclical, dynamic person-organization exchange that occurs when one finds oneself in any of these four scenarios.

The Ethical Dissonance Cycle

The Ethical Dissonance Cycle model contributes to existent literature by attempting to illustrate the interaction between the individual and the organization, based upon perceived person-organization ethical fit at various stages of the contractual relationship in each potential ethical fit scenario. To some extent, one’s relation to the community with which one identifies plays a role in self-definition (Haslam, 2004), suggesting that one’s nature responds to social contracts in which it is immersed (Jones & Hiltebeitel, 1995; Kohlberg, 1976). The EDC also attempts to illustrate how ethics levels and perceived PO fit impact interaction with the community and self-definition.

Figure 3. Ethical dissonance cycle.



Initiation of the Relationship – the Contractual Agreement

The Ethical Dissonance Cycle model begins with the employee’s entry into the organization, at which moment person-organization (PO) ethical fit is, at least, initially assumed (Coldwell et al. 2007; Sims & Kroeck, 1994). Coldwell et al. (2007) proposed their model from the position that ethical-organizational fit is dependent upon the way an individual perceives the ethical orientation of the company, as well as the corporate reputation which is based upon the organization’s level of demonstrated CSR. This is not a new concept. Judge and Cable (1997) found that individuals search for employment from organizations that share their core values, and Posner, Kouzes, and Schmidt (1985) also found that employers attempt to match up potential employees’ values with those of the organization prior to entry into a contractual agreement.

Entry into the Discovery Process Quadrants

Both individuals and organizations assume a relative level of person-organization ethical fit upon entry into a contract (Coldwell et al., 2008). However, over time, through observation of behavior and discursive activity, the perceptions of individual and corporate sense of meaning, values, significance, and direction emerge through the process of sensemaking (Weick, 2005). The discovery process will cause both the individual and the organization to realize whether or not the initially assumed ethical congruence exists in actuality (Coldwell et al., 2008) as both parties attempt to locate in which quadrant they jointly belong.

In two polar quadrants (high-high and low-low), no ethical dissonance exists. Person-organization fit is optimal, and the organization is highly effective, either to constructive or destructive ends (Pervin, 1968, Padilla et al., 2007). The other two quadrants demonstrate a lack of person-organization fit in the realm of ethics and values (high-low and low-high). Once perception of fit (or lack of fit) is assessed, Interligi (2010) proposes that both the organization and the individual initiate engagement in a process designed to either create or sustain compliance. Interligi (2010) describes this process on two levels: the organization-environment interface, in which the expectations of the stakeholders attempt to shape organizational behavior, and the organization-employee interface, in which organizations purpose to steer and sway the behavior of their employees. Whether the ethical shortfall is on the part of the individual or the organization, it triggers a cycle of socialization that will attempt to resolve the dissonance. This process is necessary for the organization, because, in the words of Ralston and Pearson (2010), “when ethical congruence does not exist [between subordinates and supervisors], trust cannot exist; and when trust is lacking, work productivity influenced by this relationship diminishes” (p.150). When individuals are identified to be ethical misfits “that either exceed or fall short of perceived organizational ethical performances” (Coldwell et al., 2008, p. 611), it will be significantly more difficult to acquire an employment contract if they are not yet hired,



or retention will require specific behavioral adjustments. Still, Coldwell et al. (2008) recognized “that once employed, specific leadership and company socialization processes can themselves enhance individuals’ moral reasoning” (p. 611). This “enhancement of individuals’ moral reasoning” cannot be assumed to always be constructive. Socialization and assimilation processes initiated by transformational leadership can also be destructive (Bass & Steidlmeier, 1999). Some of the most destructive and unethical leaders in history were charismatic leaders, but they used their charisma for evil instead of good (Luthans, Peterson, & Ibraveva, 1998; Kellman & Hamilton, 1989; Padilla et al., 2007). The following section will use existent literature to explain the process illustrated in the Ethical Dissonance Cycle (EDC) model.

High Organizational Ethics, High Individual Ethics (High-High)

Highly ethical individuals who find themselves in an organization with ethical standards that meet their expectations and match their own ethics will typically choose to continue to stay employed in the organization (Sims & Kroeck, 1994). Numerous studies point to a highly constructive efficacy when both the individual and the organization possess high ethical standards. Barker (1993) described the resulting momentum that is produced when employees expressed their mutual commitment to one another and their organization, by submitting to and enforcing the rules that they collaboratively wrote. Impartial principles of bureaucracy were introduced, documented and strengthened by perpetual peer supervision in this ethical climate. As a result, new employees were removed from probation when they demonstrated that they embraced the ethical standards by enforcing and obeying the rules (Barker, 1993). In addition to positive and smooth socialization, according to Koh and Boo (2001) morale, organizational commitment, and organizational performance have a statistical likelihood of steadily increasing when both personal and ethical ethics are high. Koh and Boo (2001) identified three distinct measures of organizational ethics: support for ethical behavior from top management, the ethical climate of the organization, and the connection between career success and ethical behavior, and found a link between these measures and job satisfaction. Koh and Boo (2004) then discovered that organizational commitment is also positively affected by ethical behavior. Specifically, Koh and Boo (2004) found that “positive ethical culture and climate produces favorable organizational outcomes… by setting down the ethical philosophy, rules of conduct and practices, [a code of ethics] can enhance corporate reputation and brand image” (p. 687), enabling employees to associate ethical behavior with success in their career. When top management proactively focuses on these variables, they are able to “enhance job satisfaction and organizational commitment… by promoting and developing a more benevolent ethical climate” (p. 686). These findings demonstrate that both external outputs (between the stakeholders and the organization) and internal outputs (between the employees and the organization) achieve maximized efficacy when personal and



organizational ethics are both high (Pervin, 1968; Posner, Kouzes, & Schmidt, 1985; Gosling & Huang, 2010).

Low Organizational Ethics, Low Individual Ethics (Low-Low)

Although PO fit is most typically associated in research with constructive outcomes (Pervin, 1968; Posner et al., 1985; Gosling & Huang, 2010), PO fit simply implies agreement between leadership/organization and followers; it has no inherent moral implication. Howell and Avolio (1992) assert, as this paper proposes, that leadership in this context is essentially a value-neutral social influence, measured in terms of the leader’s effectiveness in empowering the team to reach its collective objectives. From this perspective, a leader may be highly effective in terms of group performance outcomes, but a distinction is made between constructive and destructive leaders (Kellerman, 2004). Hitler, for example, can thus be described as a very effective leader, but he was “a prime example of destructive leadership” (Padilla et al., 2007, p. 179).

When both the individual and the organization possess low moral or ethical development, PO fit exists, but momentum is thrust into a negative direction (Brewer, 2007; Zimbardo, 2007). Brief, Buttram, and Duke (2001) found that when corruption has infiltrated an organization to the point of becoming an institution-wide force, it has its own momentum and life. At this point, it takes more conscious effort to stop the corruption than to participate in it (Ashforth & Anand, 2003). Because ethical PO fit exists, the employee will be immersed into the organization’s highly effective, highly destructive momentum (Padilla et al., 2007), typically defined by domination and oppression rather than influence and commitment (Howell & Avolio, 1992), self-centered orientation (Bass & Steidlmeier, 1999; Luthans et al., 1998; Kellman & Hamilton, 1989). Additionally, collaboration and development, equipping, or empowering of followers is not typically the mark of low-low ethical combinations (Conger, 1990), because follower empowerment would detract from the leader’s personal influence (Howell & Avolio, 1992; Bass & Steidlmeier, 1999).

Padilla et al. (2007) contended that “dysfunctional leader behaviors and susceptible followers interacting in the context of a contributing environment” (p. 179) produce negative organizational outcomes in which “followers must consent to, or be unable to resist, a destructive leader” (p. 179). Low-low ethical combinations emphasize the “leader-centric” nature of the construct (Kellerman, 2005, Yukl, 2005), and emphasize the dynamic interplay between the leader’s destructive nature, the followers’ level of susceptibility, and the ethical environment, because “the roles of followers and environmental contexts have not received adequate attention” (Padilla et al., 2007, p. 179). This creates an organizational petri dish for perpetuating collective unethical, destructive behavior in otherwise “normal” people (Brewer, 2007; Zimbardo, 2007, Zyglidopoulos & Fleming, 2008). Members will continue to remain in this cycle until



either the organization itself finally implodes, or the individual re-evaluates his or her value, perceives a lack of fit, and chooses to exit (Brewer, 2007). It should thus be noted at this point that since one’s self-perception is not immutable (Haslam, 2004), it is possible for individuals to move from one ethical PO fit quadrant to another if their self-perception is altered, their concept of the organization is altered, or something occurs out of the ordinary to challenge their code of conduct (Jones & Hiltebeitel, 1995; Brewer, 2007; Jones, 1991).

Low PO Ethical Fit Conditions

After the “organizational honeymoon” wears off, organizations or individuals may encounter stimuli that challenge their initial perception of the other party’s ethical standing (Coldwell et al., 2008). When such issues and circumstances are encountered, ethical dissonance may emerge. “Moral stress” results when incongruence between personal ethics and those perceived to be held by the organization emerges (Waters & Bird, 1987). Kelman and Hamilton (1989) proposed that one’s propensity to challenge authority when one encounters such a situation is derived from the interaction of two forces that stand in polarity to one another: binding forces (forces that strengthen the structure of authority), and opposing forces (which challenge and resist authority).

When opposing forces are more powerful than the forces that bind, one will tend to resist authority. Opposing forces are directly impacted by physical distance and psychological distance. When psychological or physical proximity increases, challenges to authority are more likely (Kelman & Hamilton, 1989). When an individual’s personal ethical ideologies, values, or developmental stage of cognitive morals are mismatched with what is perceived to be held within the organization, Wyld and Jones (1997) proposed that “the contextual influence of the ethical work climate type(s) perceived by the individual in that person’s referent organization will differentially influence [both] that person’s perception of ethical matters [and]… that person’s process of resolving ethical matters” (p. 469). In other words, if the individual perceives moral intent, despite the dissonance, the individual’s perceptions and actions may be affected. This is illustrated by the processes observed in the two opposing ethical PO fit quadrants: (a) high organizational ethics, low individual ethics, and (b) low organizational ethics and high individual ethics. While optimal efficacy is not experienced in these quadrants in the manner enjoyed by the two quadrants that possessed PO fit (Pervin, 1968), the socialization/assimilation processes are extremely active in these quadrants (Interligi, 2010).

High Organizational Ethics, Low Individual Ethics (High-Low)

If the individual possesses lower ethics than that which is held by the organization, a lack of person-organization (PO) fit will be perceived the closer the leader is to the follower (Kelman & Hamilton, 1989). If not exposed in some blatant act of challenge or



resistance (Kelman & Hamilton, 1989), the discovery of an individual’s lack of PO ethical fit is often pointed out by the socialized members within the ethical organization. Stansbury and Victor (2009) found that when an organization with high ethical standards has effectively assimilated their employees to embrace their standards, “a greater appreciation of the degree of informal pro-social control exercised by work groups upon members” (p. 282). Members who are already assimilated in such an organization have a greater likelihood of engaging in whistle-blowing activities when they identify an individual with ethical dissonance (Stansbury & Victor, 2009), initiating further pro-social activities to attempt to socialize the individual and alleviate the ethical dissonance. The process of pro-social assimilation (constructive socialization) would be initiated if a highly ethical organization discovered a member’s ethical shortfall. Once this ethical dissonance has discovered, likelihood of turnover rises (Coldwell et al., 2007; Sims & Kroeck, 1994; Gosling & Huang, 2010). The more the individual’s personal decisions are seen to be in conflict with the ethical decisions that are perceived to be encouraged by the organization, the greater the experienced (and potentially expressed) discomfort within the individual (Sims & Keon, 2000). Should the contract between the individual and the organization not be terminated, the individual would encounter proactive, pro-social activities to facilitate ethical socialization. This process could uncover further dissonance (Sims & Keon, 2000), and upon each discovery both parties have the option to continue (or re-engage in) the constructive socialization process, or terminate the contract (Sims & Kroeck, 1994; Coldwell, et al., 2008; O’Donohue & Nelson, 2009). The individual must then decide how to respond to this interaction.

Judge, Locke, Durham, and Kluger’s (1998) study revealed that an individual may initially have job satisfaction despite a lack of fit, because of high self-perception; however “if an individual’s job satisfaction is based on a distorted view of reality, it seems unlikely that these self-deceptive tendencies will prove to be adaptive in the long run” (p. 32). With this in mind, the individual with low ethical standards may find that he or she is unwilling to make the necessary personal alterations, and opt to exit the organization. If, however, the individual is responsive to the constructive socialization process, over time the dissonance will be resolved and they are able to graduate to the high/high (high organizational ethics, high individual ethics) quadrant, and will be capable of participating in the highly constructive corporate and individual efficacy that results (Pervin, 1968; Victor & Cullen, 1988 Gosling & Huang, 2009).

Low Organizational Ethics, High Individual Ethics (Low-High)

According to Koh and Boo (2004), when employees are striving to be personally ethical but “perceive little top management support for ethical behavior, an unfavorable ethical climate in their organization and/or little association between ethical behavior and job success” (p. 679), the resulting dissonance will trigger a reduction in job satisfaction.



Once this ethical dissonance is discovered, likelihood of turnover rises (Coldwell et al., 2007; Sims & Kroeck, 1994). Sims and Keon (2000) found a significant relationship between the ethical rift between one’s personal decisions and the perceived unwritten/informal policies of the organization, and the individual’s level of comfort within the organization.

Specifically, the greater the difference between the decisions that the individual made and the decisions perceived as expected and reinforced by the organization, the greater levels of discomfort the individual would feel, and the more likely the individual was to report these feelings of discomfort (Sims & Keon, 2000). If the contract between the individual and the organization remains, the individual would encounter the resulting process demonstrated on the proposed model. Statistically, the employee’s core self-evaluation scores in self-esteem, self-efficacy, locus of control, and neuroticism (Judge, Locke, Durham, & Kluger, 1998) will be a predictive factor in determining the employee’s response. If the employee scores high in self-esteem, high in self- efficacy, high in internal locus of control, and low in neuroticism, he or she will be more likely to either exit the organization or “blow the whistle” (Coldwell et al., 2007). If the employee scores low in self-esteem, low in self-efficacy, high in external locus of control, and high in neuroticism, he or she will be more likely to be vulnerable to abusive supervisor behavior (Burton & Hoobler, 2006) which would then potentially cause further cognitive dissonance and promote lower core self-evaluation scores (Judge et al., 1998). Many scholars have found individuals who were previously ethically “normal” willing to stay in unethical environments and eventually become socialized to conform to the organization’s destructive norms and adopt the unethical behavior themselves (Padilla et al., 2007; Zimbardo, 2007; Brewer, 2007; Zyglidopoulos & Fleming, 2008).

The findings from Burton and Hoobler’s (2006) study reinforce this principle when they revealed that abusive supervision was a causal factor in employee state self-esteem. This cycle continuously repeats to create “learned helplessness” (Luthans et al.,1998) until there is no longer a conscious cognitive dissonance within the follower, and unless he or she leaves the organization (Brewer, 2007; Coldwell, et al., 2008; Sims & Kroeck, 1997), the follower is immersed into a highly destructive, but highly effective leadership dynamic (Padilla et al., 2007). Zyglidopoulos and Fleming (2008) describe this process as a “continuum of destructiveness in relation to organizational corruption” (p. 265). Their study demonstrated how wrongdoing can snowball as members in the organization participate in increasingly unethical behaviors, and identified four types of actors within this continuum, ranging from full innocence to complete guilt: “innocent bystanders, innocent participants, active rationalizers and guilty perpetrators” (p.265). Members can progress from bystander to perpetrator through the process of socialization. Unlike the socialization process in an ethical organization, the assimilation process is anti-social in the sense that it creates toxic or destructive loyalties (Brewer, 2007; Zyglidopoulos & Fleming, 2008). The methods may include punitive approaches,



such as threat of losing their job or opportunities for promotions, isolation, abusive supervisory interaction and peer pressure (Brewer, 2007; Burton & Hoobler, 2006), but the destructive socialization need not include aversive consequences (Harmon-Jones, Brehm, Greenberg, Simon, & Nelson, 1996).

Numerous studies have demonstrated that induced compliance can be attained in many by introducing consonant cognitions that counterbalance the dissonant cognitions, such as providing rewards for unethical behavior or for failing to report it (Brewer, 2007), or by minimizing the significance of the effects (Harmon-Jones et al., 1996; Zyglidopoulos & Fleming, 2008). Over time, normalization of the unethical behavior occurs and permeates the individuals throughout the organization’s ethical culture. Zyglidopoulos and Fleming (2008) describe the process this way: “…this banality of corruption is rather indicative of how it gains a contextual momentum of its own, becomes rationalized and then normalized so that it is deemed more acceptable to the people involved” (p. 267). Ashforth and Anand (2003) state that rationalization is a crucial component for justifying both past, present, and future unethical actions, such as denying responsibility, appeals to higher or more significant loyalties, denying victimhood, and social weighing. According to Ashford and Anand (2003), these techniques for rationalization are utilized within an organization to negate potentially paralyzing conviction of ethical wrongdoing. Corrupt activity can then become routine within the culture, and infiltrate the corporate decision making process, enabling otherwise “law abiding” individuals to commit otherwise unthinkable acts (Staub, 1989; Darley, 1992; Zimbardo, 2007).

A perplexing consensus among researchers who have studied this destructive phenomenon has emerged, which proposes that virtually any individual is capable of being “transformed into a criminal wrongdoer given the right institutional pressures, rewards, and sanctions” (Zyglidopoulos & Fleming, 2008, p. 267). Further, Zyglidopoulos and Fleming (2008) “propose that the very distance between an act and its ethical consequences (ethical distance) may also play a determining role…in the transitional process” (p.265). Their findings are in alignment with Brewer (2007), Zimbardo (2007), Padilla et al. (2007), and Kellman and Hamilton (1989). Ultimately, the goal of the organization is to resolve the dissonance within the employee so the individual can move into the quadrant of mutually low ethics on the model (Brewer, 2007; Zyglidopoulos & Fleming, 2008), and become an active or passive participant in the organization’s highly destructive efficacy (Padilla et al., 2007; Brewer, 2007; Zyglidopoulos & Fleming, 2008).

Future Testing

To optimally test the Ethical Dissonance Model, the proposed research method is to conduct a three-part study of a minimum of 160 participants who are employed in



various positions, roles, departments and locations of corporations of various sizes. This minimum number meets the general rule of thumb to require at least 20 participants for each of the independent variables and regression analyses that would be conducted (D. Fields, personal conversation, November, 2010). Respondents would be selected by personally emailing the link to a SurveyMonkey survey to all non-traditional students in bachelor’s and master’s degree programs at a private, independent, non-profit university in central California through their school email account. This would protect their anonymity at work, while making each respondent easy to track through institutional email. Respondents would be guaranteed full anonymity, and assured that identities will not be included in the publication of results. Every respondent must have at least one year tenure in their present company, in order to establish the observation of behavioral and ethical patterns that are in line with the organization’s actual behaviors, as opposed to the employee’s expected ethical behaviors and standards upon entry (Coldwell et al., 2008; Brewer, 2007). This requirement would be articulated on the online survey.

Phase One: Placement in Ethical PO Fit Quadrants

The goal of the first phase will be to place each respondent within one of the four quadrants of the Ethical Dissonance Cycle model, utilizing a general quantitative study. In this phase, upon self-classification as “lower-level, mid-level, or upper-level” employees, the participants will be asked to respond to three measures designed to assess the participants’ ethical development, and their perception of ethical fit within the organization. The measures to be used are: the Defining Issues Test (Rest, 1990) to measure the ethical development of the employees, the Individual Beliefs about Organizational Ethics measure (Froelich & Kotte, 1991, as cited in Fields, 2002) to determine which employees accept ethically deviant behavior within an organizational context, and the Work Context Measure (DeMuth, 2006), to assess employee perception of the organization’s values and ethical standards, coworkers, supervisors, personal support, advocacy, and authority.

Rest’s (1990) Defining Issues Test (DIT) contains six scenarios that require the respondent to deliver an overall action judgment and rank the importance of several factors in his/her decision making through the use of both a ranking procedure and a 5-point Likert scale. The test produces three major indices, namely the P, D, and U scores (Wyld, Jones, Cappel, & Hallock, 1994). The P-score, which stands for “principled morality,” demonstrates the percentage of responses that a subject produces which imply the utilization of principled moral reasoning (Rest, 1975; Wyld et al., 1994). The D-score is a composite score that measures every level of moral reasoning that a respondent demonstrates (Davison & Robbins, 1978; Wyld et al., 1994). The U-score, also called the “utilizer dimension” (Wyld et al., 1994), demonstrates a mediating variable in order to improve the power to predict actual behavior as well as cognitive



moral development (Thoma, Rest, & Barnett, 1986; Thoma, 1985, as cited in Wyld et al., 1994). The test-retest reliability of the P, D, and U indices of the DIT, range from .70 and .85 as measured by Chronbach’s Alpha (Rest, 1990).

The Individual Beliefs about Organizational Ethics scale (Froelich & Kottke, 1991, as cited in Fields, 2004) identifies more keenly the individuals who are amenable to organizational behavior that is in conflict with social ethical norms. According to Fields (2004), the scale contains 10 items, six that assess the extent of agreement/disagreement with unethical behavior for the sake of support for the company (e.g. pressure to falsify a document); four that assess the extent of agreement/disagreement with unethical behavior for the sake of protecting the company (e.g. lying to a client, supervisor, or other co-worker in order to protect the company). Each item is a statement which respondents must indicate their level of agreement on a 7-point Likert-type scale (1=strongly agree; 7=strongly disagree).

Based on the reliability and validity of these scales (Rest, 1990; Fields, 2004), respondents’ composite scores of these two measures should be sufficient to determine participants’ ethical developmental levels, and perceived ethical person-organizational fit. The Work Context measure (DeMuth, 2006) will then be given to participants to determine these same employees’ perception of their organization’s work environment, including ethical/value development in comparison with their own. This measure was selected because it not only measured employee perception of the ethical values of the organization, but other potentially mitigating factors that may emerge as moderating variables in their perception of ethical dissonance (Harmon-Jones et al., 1996).The Work Context measure (DeMuth, 2006) examines six factors that relate to employees’ perception of the work environment, including Authority, External Values, Personal Support, Advocacy, Dialogue Structures, and Opportunity to Express Values at Work. Authority refers to the degree of formal power one has in the organization, and the freedom to adjust and reshape/redefine one’s role at work. Sample items for the Authority section include: “I am given the freedom to make important decisions regarding my job tasks; My boss allows me to determine how to accomplish my tasks; I cannot complete a task until I have approval from my boss on what I have done” (DeMuth, 2006, p. 202). External values refer both to values that are formally endorsed by the organization and the informal values that are perceived, including cultural values. Sample questions for external values include: “I really don’t notice any clear, consistent values in my organization; The CEO’s values fit with my own; I am confused about the way my company’s formal values fit with the informal values that I observe in my work group; The CEO of my organization clearly communicates his or her values; The values of my organization seem to change according to the situation; The values of my work group are similar to my own.” (pp. 184, 202). Personal support refers to the support that a person is given, regardless of the person’s position, role, or organizational utility. Sample questions for personal support include: “My boss treats his/her employees as



individuals, rather than all the same; I feel comfortable being myself around my co-workers; I feel a strong sense of support from my peers when I propose a new idea that they agree with” (p. 203). Advocacy refers to public formal support of someone else’s cause, ideas, efforts, and expression of related values. Advocacy also includes the provision of support in terms of effort, dedication, and loyalty. Sample items for the advocacy subscale include: “I can rely on my boss to stand up for me when there is a problem; When I have an idea for a change, my boss will go to bat for me; I can rely on my boss to support my ideas with decision makers” (DeMuth, 2006, p. 203). Dialogue structures refer to organizational structures that facilitate and support dialogical exchange. Sample items for the dialogue structures subscale include: “If an ethical issue arose at work, I would know the proper channels through which to resolve it; My work group has processes in place to address conflicts as they arise at work” (pp. 203-204). Opportunity to express values at Work refers to the provision of opportunities and venues to express values in a work context (i.e. while working or through the organization). The Work Context measure (DeMuth, 2006) contains 115 work context items, all using a 6-point Likert scale that ranges from 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree), indicating level of agreement to items that describe one’s behavior, CEO behavior, work environment, coworker(s), and supervisor. In DeMuth’s (2006) study, its coefficient alpha composite was found to be .94, with all subscale coefficient alphas within acceptable range for reliability (Authority - .83, External Values - .85, Personal support - .82, Advocacy - .87, Dialogue structures - .71, and Opportunity to express values - .88). In terms of validity, it was found to have high correlation to the Psychological Climate measure (Jones & Jones, 1989), and positive correlation was found with job satisfaction and organizational commitment (DeMuth, 2006).

The scores of the Work Context measure (DeMuth, 2006) will then be coded and cross-analyzed with the composite scores of the DIT (Rest, 1974) and the Individual Beliefs About Organizational Ethics (Froelich & Kottke, 1991). Based upon the findings, each respondent will be placed in the ethical PO fit quadrant that reflects their responses. This will demonstrate the principle in the proposed model that every member in the organization will fall into one of the four quadrants, based upon personal ethics and the perceived ethics of the organization.

Phase Two: Testing the Person-Organization Exchanges in Each Quadrant

Now that placement has been established, the processes and dynamic exchanges that the model describes for members in each quadrant must also be tested. In this second phase, the participants in each quadrant will complete the Industrial Relations Event Scale (Kelloway, Barling, and Shah, 1993) and Kacmar and Ferris’ (1991) Perceptions of Organizational Politics Scale (POPS).



According to Fields (2004), the Industrial Relations Event Scale’s (Kelloway et al., 1993) methodology uses life events to provide three scores: “the occurrence of industrial relations events, the perceived negativity of such events, and the positive perception of industrial relations” (Fields, 2004, p. 143). In this measure, participants only score the industrial relations stressors that transpired on a specified day or during a particular period (Fields, 2004). Among the list of 25 events that the IRES measures are: “Conflict with supervisor or subordinates; Unfair labor practices; Dealing with resistance to change; Being discriminated against; Failure to use industrial relations procedures; being victimized; Being intimidated; Being disciplined; Injustice and inequality; Being called abusive names; Not knowing who to turn to; Lack of trust; Job insecurity; Change in working conditions; Not being represented adequately (Fields, 2004, p. 144). Customary measures of reliability are inappropriate for this measure, because each respondent’s recorded stressful industrial relations events during the specified time frame, as well as the events’ perceived strength and directional impact (positive or negative) will likely vary (Fields, 2004). However, Kelloway et al. (1993, as cited by Fields, 2004) found a positive correlation between positive mood, job satisfaction, and positive industrial relations stress. Negative industrial relations stress was found to be negatively linked to job satisfaction and positive mood, and positively linked to negative mood. Therefore, if the Ethical Dissonance Model is valid, the responses from participants should reflect each quadrant’s predictions. In the two quadrants that demonstrate ethical PO fit, positive industrial relations stress scores should be higher (Pervin, 1968; Pozner et al., 1985; Schneider, 1987). Despite lack of ethical PO fit, respondents who land in the High-Low quadrant would still be expected to have higher positive industrial relations stress scores than those who are placed in the Low-High quadrant, because assimilation/socialization techniques in an organization with high ethics will be pro-social (Trevino, 1992). Individuals who are mapped in the Low-High quadrant would be expected to have high negative industrial relations stress scores, due to the unethical, destructive, and antisocial socialization techniques that such organizations employ to attempt to either assimilate or force out those with higher ethical standards (Brewer, 2007; Zyglidopoulos & Fleming, 2008; Zimbardo, 2007).

The Perceptions of Organizational Politics Scale (Kacmar and Ferris, 1991, as cited in Fields, 2004) should further clarify and reinforce the demonstrated nature of the person-organization relational exchanges in each quadrant. This scale evaluates how much an employee perceives the political nature of the job setting, including supervisor behavior and co-worker actions (Fields, 2004). The scale uses 12 items in three dimensions: general political behavior (e.g. “One group always gets their way; favoritism not merit gets people ahead; Don’t speak up for fear of retaliation” (Fields, 2004, p. 119), “get ahead” political behavior (e.g. all reverse scored: “Promotions go to top performers; Rewards come to hard workers; No place for yes men” (Fields, 2004, p. 119), and pay and promotion policy items (e.g. “Pay and promotion policies are not politically



applied; Pay and promotion decisions are consistent with policies” Fields, 2004, p. 120). Validity of the described processes within Ethical Dissonance model would be reflected if the respondents in the quadrants of high organizational ethics (High – High and High – Low quadrants) produced low scores in perceived organizational politics. The highest anticipated scores for perceived organizational politics would be expected to be produced by respondents with high ethics who are in an organization with low ethics (in the Low-High quadrant), because based on the proposed model, the organization would be engaged in these political behaviors in an attempt to motivate the individual to resolve the dissonance and assimilate (Brewer, 2007; Zimbardo, 2007). In the Low-Low quadrant, these behaviors are likely to be occurring (Padilla et al., 2008), but due to the low ethical development and active participation of the individual, the respondents would not necessarily be expected to be aware of the politics in which they were now fully engaged (Brewer, 2007; Zyglidopoulos & Fleming, 2008; Zimbardo, 2007; Ashforth & Anand, 2003).

Phase Three: Phenomenological Interviews

Now that respondents have been placed in their respective quadrants and person-organization exchange cycles have been established, the final proposed step is to conduct a qualitative study to bring depth and detail to the quantitative findings (Creswell, 2009). The individual who produced the strongest composite scores for fit in each quadrant would be interviewed from a phenomenological approach. Each of these respondents would be asked the following questions: (a) How did you come to work for your company? (b) How would you describe your approach to ethics at home and at work? (c) How would you describe your perception of the ethical values of your company? (d) Can you describe for me how you interact with your company when you encounter an ethical dilemma? (e) Can you describe for me how your company interacts with you when you encounter an ethical dilemma? (f) Can you describe for me the frequency and intensity of your encounters with ethical issues at work? (g) How have these exchanges between yourself and your company during ethical dilemmas affected you? (h) How have these exchanges between yourself and your company during ethical dilemmas effected your commitment to your company and job?

The responses to these questions would be coded and evaluated. Identified themes would be subjected to multiple regression analysis to determine prime causal forces related to ethical PO fit, ethical development, and organizational commitment. Coding of themes would also be compared with the quantitative findings, to add dimension, depth, and detail to the hard data. This three-phase testing process should effectively test the reliability and validity of the Ethical Dissonance Cycle model by placing each respondent in the appropriate PO fit quadrant and assessing the nature, direction, and intensity of the person-organization dynamic exchange that respondents experience within the context of each quadrant.



Limitations

The Ethical Dissonance Model is expressly limited to demonstrating the ethical dimension(s) of PO fit and the processes that are associated with each fit option. It is not meant to be generalized to apply to all PO fit issues. A regression threat exists because respondents who are prone to high affective responses may provide extreme scores in such a sensitive area as ethics. In such cases, responses may vary with mood or current work conditions. The researcher will be unable to control which of the students respond, due to the method of survey distribution for the sake of protected anonymity.

Another threat to validity is the potential for diffusion of treatment. All participants will be students at the same private, independent university in central California. If participants discuss their answers during any phase of the research process, their communication can skew the overall outcomes (Creswell, 2009). This will be addressed by requiring a confidentiality agreement in the survey’s introductory email. Participants would be required to agree not disclose survey content or responses with other students until the completion of all data collection.

Conclusion

This paper proposed a new model designed to describe what happens between individuals and organizations once a demonstrable perception of ethical PO fit has been established. The Ethical Dissonance Cycle built upon the work of Kohlberg (1976), and the models of Rest (1990), Jones (1991), and Jones and Hiltebeitel (1995). The model fills in an area of lack in research by extending exploration of ethical development in the organizational context beyond the examination of isolated moral and ethical decisions, on either the organization’s part or the individual’s part, and connecting all ethical PO fit dimensions to their corresponding person-organization exchanges.

Further research is recommended to explore in greater detail the processes experienced in each quadrant, and how these experiences will impact individuals’ method for selecting organizations to work for in the future.

About the Author

MaryJo Burchard is now at the Visalia Center of Fresno Pacific University, where she is assistant director for Kings County programs. She also serves as adjunct faculty in the Organizational Leadership B.A. completion program at Fresno Pacific, where she earned her M.A. in Leadership and Organizational Studies and a graduate certificate in Peacemaking and Conflict Management in the Workplace. She is currently pursuing a Ph.D. in Organizational Leadership with an emphasis in Ecclesial Leadership from



Regent University. MaryJo and her husband Kenny have served in pastoral ministry for more than 15 years. Her passion is to help mentor and develop Godly servant leaders in the workplace and the church, in every generation.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to MaryJo Burchard, 921 E. Elm St., Hanford, CA 93230. [Email: [email protected]].

References

Ashforth, B. E. and Anand, V. (2003). The normalization of corruption and organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 25, 1-52.

Barker, J. R. (1993). Tightening the iron cage: Concertive control in self-managing teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 408-437.

Bass, B. M., & Steidlmeier, P. (1999). Ethics, character, and authentic transformational leadership behavior. Leadership Quarterly, 10, 181–218.

Brewer, L. (2007). Is there a little bit of Enron in all of us? Journal for Quality and Participation, 30(1), 26-30.

Brief, A. P., Buttram, R. T., & Dukerich, J. M. (2001). Collective corruption in the corporate world: Toward a process model. In M. E. Turner (Ed.) Groups at Work: Theory and Research. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. 471-499.

Brown, M., Treviño, L. K., & Harrison, D. (2005). Ethical leadership: A social learning perspective for construct development and testing. Organizational Behavior and Human Processes, 97(2), 117-134.

Bunderson, J. S. (2001). How work ideologies shape the psychological contracts of employees: Doctors’ responses to perceived breach. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22(7), 717-741.

Burton, J., & Hoobler, J. (2006). Subordinate self-esteem and abusive supervision. Journal of Managerial Issues, 18(3), 340-356.

Coldwell, D., Billsberry, J., van Meurs, N., & Marsh, P. (2008). The effects of person-organization ethical fit on employee attraction and retention: Towards a testable explanatory model. Journal of Business Ethics, 78, 611–622.

Conger, J. (1990). The dark side of leadership. Organizational Dynamics, 19, 44−55.

Creswell, J. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.



Darley, J. M. (1992). Social organization for the production of evil. Psychological Inquiry, 3(2), 199-218.

DeMuth, R. L. (2006). Antecedents and consequences of value expression in the workplace. Ph.D. dissertation. Northern Illinois University.

Donaldson, T., & Dunfee, T. W. (1994). Toward a unified conception of business ethics: Integrative social contracts theory. Academy of Management Review, 19(2), 252-283.

Dubinsky, A. J. & Liken, B. (1989). Analyzing ethical decision making in marketing. Journal of Business Research, 19(2), 83-107.

Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (1984). Social cognition. New York: Random House.

Gosling, M., & Huang, H. J. (2009). The fit between integrity and integrative social contracts theory. Journal of Business Ethics, 90, 407–417.

Harmon-Jones, E., Brehm, J., Greenberg, J., Simon, L., & Nelson, D. (1996). Evidence that the production of aversive consequences is not necessary to create cognitive dissonance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(1), 5-16.

Haslam, S. A. (2004). Psychology in organizations: The social identity approach, 2nd Edition. London: Sage Publications Ltd.

Howell, J. M., & Avolio, B. J.(1992). The ethics of charismatic leadership: Submission or liberation. Academy of Management Executive, 6, 43–54.

Interligi, L. (2010). Compliance culture: A conceptual framework. Journal of Management & Organization, 16, 235–249.

Jones, S. K., & Hiltebeitel, K. M. (1995). Organizational influence in a model of the moral decision process of accountants. Journal of Business Ethics, 14(6), 417-431.

Jones, T. M. (1991). Ethical decision making by individuals in organizations: An issue-contingent model. Academy of Management. The Academy of Management Review, 16(2), 366-395.

Judge, T. A., & Cable, D. M. (1997). Applicant personality, organizational culture and organization attraction. Personnel Psychology, 50, 359-394.

Judge, T., Locke, E., Durham, C., & Kluger, A. (1998). Dispositional effects on job and life satisfaction: The role of core evaluations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(1), 17-34.



Kellerman, B. (2004). Bad leadership: What it is, how it happens, why it matters. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Kelman, H. C., & Hamilton, V. L. (1989). Crimes of obedience: Toward a social psychology of authority and responsibility. New Haven, CT: Yale.

Koh, H. C., & Boo, E. H. (2001). The link between organizational ethics and job satisfaction: A study of managers in Singapore. Journal of Business Ethics, 29, 309-324.

Koh, H. C., & Boo, E. H. (2004). Organizational ethics and employee satisfaction and commitment. Management Decision, 42(5/6), 677-693.

Kohlberg, L. (1984). The psychology of moral development: Nature and validity of moral stages. San Francisco: Harper and Row.

Luthans, F., Peterson, S., & Ibraveva, L. (1998). Potential for the “dark side” of leadership in post-Communist countries. Journal of World Business, 33(2) 185-201.

Nguyen, N., & Biderman, M. (2008). Studying ethical judgments and behavioral intentions using structural equations: Evidence from the Multidimensional Ethics Scale. Journal of Business Ethics, 83, 627–640.

Padilla, A. Hogan, R., & Kaiser, R. (2007). The toxic triangle: Destructive leaders, susceptible followers, and conducive environments. Leadership Quarterly, 18(3), 176-194.

Pervin, L. A. (1968). Performance and satisfaction as a function of individual environment fit. Psychological Bulletin, 69, 56-68.

Posner, B. Z., Kouzes, J. M., & Schmidt, W. H. (1985). Shared values make a difference. Human Resources Management, 24, 293-309.

Ralston, D., & Pearson, A. (2010). The cross-cultural evolution of the subordinate influence ethics measure. Journal of Business Ethics, 96, 149-168.

Rest, J. R. (1979). Development in judging moral issues. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Rest, J. R. (1986). Moral development: Advances in research and theory. New York: Praeger Press.

Schneider, B. (1987). The people make the place. Personnel Psychology, 40, 437-453.



Sims, R., & Keon, T. (2000). The influence of organizational expectations on ethical decision making conflict. Journal of Business Ethics, 23(2), 219-228.

Sims, R., & Kroeck, K. G. (1994). The influence of ethical fit on employee satisfaction, commitment and turnover. Journal of Business Ethics, 13(12), 939-948.

Stansbury, J., & Victor, B. (2009). Whistle-blowing among young employees: A life-course perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 85(3), 281-299.

Staub, E. (1989). The roots of evil: The origins of genocide and other group violence. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Thoma, S. J., Rest, J., & Barnett, R. (1986). Moral judgment, behavior, decision making, and attitudes in moral development: Advances in research and theory. New York: Praeger.

Thompson, J., & Hart, W. (2006). Psychological contracts: A nano-level perspective on contract theory. Journal of Business Ethics, 68, 229-241.

Treviño, L. K. (1986). Ethical decision making in organizations: A person-situation interactionist model. Academy of Management Review 11, 601–617.

Treviño, L. K., & Ball, G. (1992).The social implications of punishing unethical behavior: Observers’ cognitive and affective reactions. Journal of Management, 18, 4.

Victor, B., & Cullen, J. B. (1988). The organizational bases of ethical work climates. Administrative Science Quarterly, 33(1), 101-125.

Waters, J. A., & Bird, F. (1987). The moral dimension of organizational culture. Journal of Business Ethics, 6, 5-22.

Weick, K., Sutcliffe, K., & Obstfeld, D. (2005). Organizing and the process of sensemaking. Organizational Science 6(11), 409-421. doi:10.1287/orse.1050.0133.

Wood, R., & Bandura, A. (1989). Social cognitive theory of organizational management. Academy of Management. The Academy of Management Review, 14(3), 361.

Wyld, D., & Jones, C. (1997). The importance of context: The ethical work climate construct and models of ethical decision making – an agenda for research. Journal of Business Ethics, 16(4), 465-473.

Wyld, D. C., Jones, C. A., Cappel, S. D., & Hallock, D. E. (1994). A partial test of the synthesis integrated model of ethical decision making: Cognitive moral development and managerial moral deliberation. Management Research News, 17(3, 4), 17.



Zimbardo, P. (2007). The Lucifer effect. San Francisco: Random House.

Zyglidopoulos, S., & Fleming, P. (2008). Ethical distance in corrupt firms: How do innocent bystanders become guilty perpetrators? Journal of Business Ethics, 78, 265–274.